What is the best answer for why the Renaissance started in Italy?

The Renaissance Began in Italy, Because Italy Was the Birthplace of Antiquity . The Renaissance began in Italy, the birthplace of the Roman Empire. Following the fall of the empire in the 4th century, and the subsequent dark ages, the incredible art and ideas of Roman times were temporarily lost.

What did the Renaissance of Italy refer to?

To summarize, Italy was the birthplace of the Renaissance, a historical period beginning in the late fourteenth century in which people again started taking interest in the learning of the earlier times during Greece and Rome. As the French word 'Renaissance' implies, it was a rebirth of these ideals .

What 3 things did the Italian Renaissance focus on?

The Italian Renaissance transformed almost every aspect of life. Humanism led to an increased interest in various studies, and this secular view of society and emphasis on creation led to many achievements. The most visible characteristic changes were seen in philosophy, economics, and arts and culture .

What is the Renaissance in Italy section summary?

Section Summary In Italy, it began in the 1300s and reached its peak around 1500 . Instead of focusing on religion, as in the Middle Ages, the Renaissance explored the human experience. At the same time, there was a new emphasis on individual achievement.

What are 3 reasons why the Renaissance spread in Italy?

5 Reasons Why the Renaissance Began in Italy It had been the heart of the Roman Empire. ... Extensive scholarly activity recovered vital ancient works. ... Its city-states allowed art and new ideas to flourish. ... Vast trading links encouraged cultural and material exchange. ... The Vatican was a rich and powerful patron. Mar 1, 2021

What were the two reasons why Italian Renaissance city-states were so wealthy?

And the Italian city states were very wealthy for two reasons. First, many city states were mini-industrial powerhouses each specializing in a particular industrial product like Florence made cloth, Milan made arms. Second, the cities of Venice and Genoa got stinking rich from trade.

What was the Italian Renaissance best known for?

The Italian Renaissance has a reputation for its achievements in painting, architecture, sculpture, literature, music, philosophy, science, technology, and exploration .

What was the main idea of the Italian Renaissance?

A few main themes that can guide your discussion of all the major Italian Renaissance works include: The revival of classical styles and ideas (specifically humanism), return to the naturalistic style (3D objects and space), and the rising status of the individual (both artist and patron) .

How did the Renaissance change Italy?

During the Renaissance, changes also occurred in the political and economic structure of Italy that foreshadowed larger transformations for all of Europe. The Renaissance saw the rise of strong central governments and an increasingly urban economy, based on commerce rather than agriculture .

What are 3 big ideas from the Renaissance?

Three big ideas from the Renaissance were: humanism, Classicism, and form .

What was the most important factor in the Italian Renaissance?

Answer and Explanation: An important factor in the emergence of the Italian Renaissance was the rise of independent city-states like Florence and Urbino . The leaders there were major supporters of the arts. Another important factor was the discovery of ancient Roman sculptures.

Which 3 main areas were first impacted by the Italian Renaissance?

The city of Rome, the papacy, and the Papal States were all affected by the Renaissance.

What best describes the Italian Renaissance?

For centuries, scholars have agreed that the Italian Renaissance (another word for “rebirth”) happened just that way: that between the 14th century and the 17th century, a new, modern way of thinking about the world and man's place in it replaced an old, backward one .

What were the main features of the Renaissance in Italy?

The seven characteristics of the Renaissance are as follows: Rebirth of Naturalism. Perspective and Depth in Art. Create Non Religious Themes. Privately Owned Art. Advancements in new technologies such as printing and gunpowder. Shift in balance of power among Europe's ruling elite. More items...

What role did Italy play in the Renaissance?

Answer: Florence was the major center of the renaissance culture for art, architecture, its banking center, and its trade in woolen cloth . Florence was the city that bought in lots of money for Italy and that money helped influence the renaissance age greatly with its art and architecture achievements and ideas.

Italy: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present

EUROPEAN

N AT I O N S

I TALY A REFERENCE GUIDE FROM THE RENAISSANCE TO THE PRESENT

Roland Sarti

To my granddaughter, Jeannette R. Beaudet, with love

Italy: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present Copyright © 2004 by Roland Sarti All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher. For information contact: Facts On File, Inc. 132 West 31st Street New York NY 10001 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sarti, Roland, 1937Italy : a reference guide from the Renaissance to the present / by Roland Sarti. p. cm.—(European nations) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8160-4522-4 1. Italy—History—Dictionaries. I. Title. II. European nations series. DG461.S27 2004 945—dc22

2003062687

Facts On File books are available at special discounts when purchased in bulk quantities for businesses, associations, institutions or sales promotions. Please call our Special Sales Department in New York at (212) 967-8800 or (800) 322-8755. You can find Facts On File on the World Wide Web at http://www.factsonfile.com Text design by David Strelecky Cover design by Semadar Megged Maps by Dale Williams Printed in the United States of America VB FOF 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 This book is printed on acid-free paper.

CONTENTS Foreword v Introduction vi History of Italy 1 GEOGRAPHY AND POPULATION MOVEMENTS THE PAPACY RENAISSANCE STATES AND SOCIETY SECULAR CULTURE IN THE AGE OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT THE FRENCH REVOLUTION AND NAPOLEON THE RESTORATION ANTI-RESTORATION IDEAS AND MOVEMENTS MOVEMENTS OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE AND UNITY THE REVOLUTIONS OF 1848–1849 THE DECADE OF PREPARATION THE YEARS OF DECISION THE POLITICS OF THE LIBERAL STATE THE LIBERALISM OF GIOVANNI GIOLITTI THE GREAT WAR THE POSTWAR CRISIS AND THE RISE OF FASCISM THE SEIZURE OF POWER THE FASCIST REGIME IN ACTION FOREIGN POLICY AND THE ROAD TO WAR WAR AND THE DOWNFALL OF THE FASCIST REGIME POSTWAR RECONSTRUCTION CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC DOMINANCE AND CENTRIST PARTY POLITICS

3 7 9 15 18 22 27 30 33 35 37 41 46 49 53 58 61 64 69 75 79

82 87

THE OPENING TO THE LEFT PROFILE AND POLITICS OF A CHANGING WORLD

93 Historical Dictionary A–Z 635 Chronology 651 Appendixes 653 661

MAPS RULERS AND STATESMEN OF ITALY, 1861 TO THE PRESENT

665 Bibliography 684 Index

FOREWORD This series was inspired by the need of high school and college students to have a concise and readily available history series focusing on the evolution of the major European powers and other influential European states in the modern age—from the Renaissance to the present. Written in accessible language, the projected volumes include all of the major European countries: France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, and Russia, as well as other states such as Spain, Portugal, Austria, and Hungary that have made important intellectual, political, cultural, and religious contributions to Europe and the world. The format has been designed to facilitate usage and includes a short introduction by the author of each volume, a specialist in its history, providing an overview of the importance of the particular country in the modern period. This is followed by a narrative history of each nation from the time of the Renaissance to the present. The core of the volume consists of an A–Z dictionary of people, events, and places, providing coverage of intellectual, political, diplomatic, cultural, social, religious, and economic developments. Next, a chronology details key events in each nation’s development over the past several centuries. Finally, the end matter includes a selected bibliography of readily available works, maps, and an index to the material within the volume. —Frank J. Coppa, General Editor St. John’s University

INTRODUCTION Italy is easily recognized on the map as the boot-shaped peninsula that juts out into the Mediterranean Sea. Archaeology tells us something about its early inhabitants and history. There is evidence that pile dwellers, the so-called Villanovian culture, lived in the Po Valley of northern Italy from about 1000 B.C. We know about the Ligurians, a later population that inhabited central and northern Italy, from their custom of cremating their dead and burying their ashes in urns. If the modest artifacts found in their places of burial are any indication, the Ligurians were not a wealthy people, but they were not primitives either. They seem to have brought with them, perhaps from central Europe, the technology of the Iron Age, which in turn may have been learned by contact with ancient Egypt. If that is the case, then the early history of the Italian peninsula confirms the dictum that in ancient times civilization moved from east to west. Aside from such basic information, the prehistory of the peninsula is mostly uncharted territory. The historic populations, those about which we have written records, are later arrivals, including possibly the Etruscans, whose language is only partly deciphered. Linguistically, they were a population apart from all others, though not culturally, economically, or politically. They ruled a vast territory that stretched from just south of the Po Valley to as far south as Rome, which was initially an Etruscan colony. The Romans were also early immigrants, part of a large flow of Latin-speaking populations that formed confederations of towns known by such names as “Sabini,” “Umbri,” and “Lucani.” These early populations are known collectively as the “Italic people.” The principal ethnic ingredients of the future Italian nation were in place by about 1000 B.C. Greeks, Phoenicians from what is today Lebanon, and Carthaginians from North Africa came later, attracted to the peninsula by its fertile soil and abundant forests. The attraction that the peninsula exerted on these populations is behind the theory that derives the name “Italy” from the Latin word for “calf,” vitulus. Ancient visitors impressed by the abundance of livestock called those parts of the land that they knew Vitelia, the land of calves, then shortened it to Italia. Ancient Roman writers were the first to apply the name to the entire peninsula south of the Po Valley. The notion that Italy is a land of plenty survived the centuries in spite of the ravages of man and nature. Overpopulation, wars, deforestation, soil depletion, malaria, earthquakes, and other natural disasters degraded the environment, but the notion that Italy is a land of plenty

Introduction vii

endured until the 19th century. At that time patriots believed that political independence and unity were all that was needed to develop the rich resources of the peninsula. They were not the first or last to blame economic problems on the shortcomings of government. This work does not reach into the distant past. It covers approximately the last 500 years of political, economic, social, and cultural developments. Political developments provide the framework because they are the most obvious route to the question of how power develops and is used. We begin with an event that historians recognize as marking a turning point in Italian history, the French invasion of 1494. From that date, bad government, lack of civic spirit, corruption, and divisiveness could be blamed on the foreign powers that controlled the states of the Italian peninsula directly or indirectly. France, Spain, and the Austrian Empire dominated in succession, helped by the fact that Italians had been politically divided and unaccustomed to working together since the decline of the Roman Empire in the fifth century. The question of national independence and unification is therefore the central issue of Italian history in the last 500 years, which is approximately the span of time covered by this work. The movement to achieve national independence and unity is called the Risorgimento, a term that means resurgence and revival. Its use indicates that those Italians who set out to unify the country were inspired by their vision of past glories. These included the power of ancient Rome, the spiritual primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, the commercial feats of medieval communes, and the artistic splendors of the city-states of the Renaissance. The memory of those glories was the key element in creating a sense of national identity. What was missing after centuries of foreign rule was the sense of what it meant to be Italian. Patriots believe that a population does not constitute a people in the modern sense of the word unless its members share certain fundamental values that transcend divisions of family, region, wealth, and language. The notion that a people share a common identity by virtue of sharing the same history, territory, language, religion, and customs is a modern one. That notion has faced powerful obstacles in Italy due to the internal diversity of the peninsula. Medieval documents occasionally refer to italicos, and universities listed students as belonging to an “Italian nation,” but the inhabitants of the peninsula were more commonly referred as Lombards, Venetians, Tuscans, Romans, Neapolitans, or Sicilians. Regional identities have deep roots in Italian history, but that is not to say that italianità, the notion of a shared Italian identity, has no basis in history. It has been there as a concept that spread from the top. It was an abstraction formulated by writers looking for a principle of unity in a land that was profoundly divided. The history of the Italian peninsula has provided its inhabitants with many overlapping and sometimes conflicting identities. In ancient times they could think of themselves as members of a particular clan, inhabitants of a particular town, subjects of a particular ruler, or citizens of the multiethnic Roman Empire. In the Middle Ages they could identify with the Catholic Church, with a ruling dynasty, or that nebulous entity called the Holy Roman Empire. What was missing for most people was the intermediate link

viii Italy

of italianità that connected the particular to the universal. Recent scholarship also tends to neglect that link, looking instead to the regional, cultural, and economic differences that undermine the notion of national identity and relegate the state to the role of secondary agent. This work reflects the belief that in modern times the national state is the chief dispenser and arbiter of power; it is the vital link between the specificity of the local and the abstraction of the universal. The national question remains the central issue of Italian history.

HISTORY OF ITALY

GEOGRAPHY AND POPULATION MOVEMENTS The search for shared realities begins with geography, which can be thought of as the stage on which humans construct their history. Location, terrain, and climate are geographical constants. The Italian peninsula is the third and most centrally located of three major Mediterranean peninsulas, the Spanish being the most westward and the Balkans the most eastward. The central location in an inland sea has been both an advantage and a handicap. Italy is well situated to take advantage of opportunities to trade, travel, and mix with other populations of the Mediterranean region, but is also confined to that region if barred from access to the wider oceans. The independent communes and city-states of medieval and Renaissance times thrived as long as the Mediterranean was the principal hub of trade and communications. They lagged behind populations situated on the shores of the Atlantic Ocean when trade routes shifted toward the oceans in the 15th and 16th centuries. It was then that power shifted to Spain, France, England, and the Netherlands, which also enjoyed the advantage of political unity. The gap was in economic and political clout, not in cultural matters. It is important to keep in mind that culturally Italy has always been part of Europe. Nothing that happened in Europe left it untouched. Let us take a closer look at the geography of the peninsula, beginning with the islands of Sicily and Sardinia that are usually left for last and are sometimes overlooked or treated as mere appendages. In ancient times they were far more central to the life of the Mediterranean than most mainland regions. Sardinia, the more isolated of the two, retains its own distinct identity better than most other regions. Settled by a prehistoric population that has left behind thousands of mysterious tower-like structures called nuraghe, it was later settled by Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Romans, Greeks, and Arabs. Its history introduces us to an important aspect of Italian history. It points to the fact that Italy is a land where, in the course of centuries, different populations have settled and mixed. We think of Italy as a country of emigrants, but foremost in its history Italy has been a place of reception and settlement of immigrant populations. One more thing needs to be said about the history of Sardinia. Its name crops up frequently in modern Italian history because the island gave its name to the kingdom that played a key role in the Risorgimento. In the 19th century the state called the kingdom of Sardinia comprised, besides the island that gave it its name, the regions of Savoy, Piedmont, and Liguria, all located on the mainland. It was ruled by the House of Savoy, the dynasty that played a central role

4 Italy

in the movement for national unification. How the kingdom of Sardinia acquired its name is part of the history of 18th-century European diplomacy that we shall look at further on. Sicily, the largest and most central of the Mediterranean islands, was an even more attractive place of settlement than Sardinia. Separated from the Italian mainland by the narrow waters of the Strait of Messina, it has had a much closer relationship with the rest of Italy. The Romans took it from the Greeks and Carthaginians in the third century B.C. Since then, no government in power on the mainland has been indifferent to the affairs of Sicily. And no government could ignore the fact that fewer than 100 miles separate the island from the African continent. Arabs from North Africa conquered Sicily in the ninth century and held it for almost 200 years, until evicted by the Normans at the end of the 11th century. It is a favorite point of entry for African and Mediterranean populations making their way to the continent. It is still a favorite, if risky, point of access today for thousands of illegal immigrants on their way to the continent. Sicily became an unwilling part of the Kingdom of Naples in the 13th century. It took a revenge of sorts in the 19th when the Kingdom of Naples was renamed the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. The island’s strategic location and economic importance reinforce Italy’s Mediterranean character. While Italy’s northern regions pull the country toward the continent, Sicily pulls it toward Africa and the Near East. The Italian mainland also attracted populations from the continent. Franks, Lombards, Normans, and other Germanic populations arrived in the Middle Ages as conquerors and/or settlers, the distinction between the two being rather unclear. The number of these arrivals is a subject of debate, but most historians agree that these population movements were not on a large scale. They may have come to conquer, but stayed on to govern, cultivate, intermarry, and blend with even earlier settlers. Franks and Lombards formed feudal aristocracies, ruled from their castles in the countryside, and did not look with favor on towns that questioned their authority and wanted independence. But the towns had their way, became independent communes, and developed into citystates that wiped out the feudal nobility, or compelled them to take up residence in the cities. The aristocrats still caused mischief in the cities, because they were a quarrelsome lot and often lived in towers that were the urban equivalents of their rural castles. But the towers of misbehaving lords could be attacked and razed to the ground. Feudal families eventually abandoned their wild ways and became part of the urban landscape. In a nutshell, that is the history of medieval communes. The aristocracies blended in, but their foreign provenance has left traces in the language, names, cuisine, and customs of the Italian peninsula. Italian culture is a composite of many different cultures, partly homogenized by their centuries-old coexistence but still distinct enough to be recognizable for what they once were. The sea is one geographic constant for the inhabitants of the peninsula, mountains are another. The mountain range of the Alps sets the Italian peninsula apart from the rest of continental Europe. The Apennines, an offshoot of the Alps, cross the northern part of the peninsula from west to east before turn-

Geography and Population Movements 5

ing southward toward the southernmost region of Calabria and reemerging on the island of Sicily in somewhat tamer form. In their eastward progress the Apennines mark off the southern edge of the Po Valley, Italy’s largest plain and the only one with enough water to sustain a prosperous agriculture. The Italian peninsula would not exist at all were it not for the fact that millions of years ago, enormous natural upheavals raised the Apennines from the sea. These mountains are the backbone of the peninsula and cover about one-third of its territory. The hills that flank the Apennines cover another third. Variations in latitude, elevation, exposure, and terrain in these hilly and mountainous regions make for the multitude of micro-climates that characterize the Italian landscape. In Italy, diversity is a function of geography. Mountain strongholds and retreats once provided protection from invaders, and many mountain towns and villages still look like the fortified places that they once were. People fled to them for safety, not for comforts. Mountains do not make for easy living. Their impervious terrain makes enormous demands on those who work and travel. The soil is thin, water is scarce in the southern regions, forests were depleted long ago. Families and communities guard their resources jealously. Familism and campanilismo, social phenomena that, respectively, denote strong, some would say excessive, dependence on the family unit and local community, are rooted in these hardships of life. The family provided security and, if things worked out well, the way to power. Marriage strategies were part of the pursuit of security and power at all levels of society, from peasant communities to princely states. Kinship networks played a role in the politics of the Renaissance states, in the movement for national unification, and every major aspect of public life. But let’s not tar all people with the same brush. Mountain populations were also the first to have small families and to emigrate. The “problem of the mountains” affects all regions from north to south. It was once a problem of overpopulation; today it is a problem of demographic depletion caused by low birth rates and the flight of millions to cities at home and abroad. Population movements are not unrelated to the state of political affairs. Theoretically, strong government has the option to open or shut the doors to outside populations, while weak government leaves the decision to others. In reality, the choices are not so clear-cut. The power and resources of imperial Rome were both a deterrent and an attraction. Roman armies deterred invaders until the imperial administration fell apart, but the wealth of the court and of important families, the lure of big-city life, of panem et circenses, attracted new arrivals. Imperial Rome was a cosmopolitan city, and cities were bases of imperial power. The Roman city was so well rooted in Italy that it outlasted the empire itself. The exodus to the countryside of the early Middle Ages depopulated but did not destroy the cities. Cities survived as religious centers, as administrative headquarters, and as marketplaces. Living in cities carried a social prestige reflected in words that we still use: the word “urbane,” meaning educated and socially polished, derives from urbe, the Latin word for “city”; a villain (villano) was an inhabitant of the countryside, a peasant. Americans idealize life on the land; Italians associate the good life with the amenities and conveniences of city living.

6 Italy

The Roman Forum viewed from the Palatine Hill, ca. 1909 (Library of Congress)

Rome lost its role as the imperial capital in A.D. 331, when Emperor Constantine moved the capital to the city of Byzantium on the Bosporus, but the move did not diminish the attraction that populations on the move felt for Rome and the Italian peninsula. What did diminish was the ability of Rome to guard its frontiers. Byzantium was strong enough to protect its immediate borders, but Rome was not, and Italy was the most attractive prize. It had good land, rich towns, skilled workers, and an educated upper class from which the newcomers could learn the arts of business and public administration. The socalled barbarians may not have been so barbaric after all if they valued living in a settled territory and learning the arts of commerce and government. Waves of newcomers arrived with alarming regularity for some six centuries. The Visigoths shocked the world by sacking Rome in A.D. 410 before moving on to other targets and eventually settling in Spain. In A.D. 476 Germanic troops deposed Romulus Augustulus, the last ruler to hold the title of Roman emperor in Italy. Ostrogoths, Lombards, Muslims, Avars, and Vikings followed. The Lombards settled, the others mostly raided and left. The age of invasions ended around A.D. 1000 with the arrival of the Magyars from central Europe, the last of the marauding tribes. The start of the Crusades in the 11th century signaled a reversal of the trend. Europeans, including many Italians, began to look upon the Near East as a land of conquest and settlement.

T HE PAPACY A closer look at these events throws light on a development with major consequence. The rise of the papacy was a direct consequence of political developments in the early Middle Ages. When the imperial court moved to Byzantium, the bishops of Rome assumed some of its functions. Pope Leo I (440–61) is credited with saving Rome from the Huns and grappling with the problem of how to deal with barbarian kingdoms sprouting from the ruins of the Roman empire. Leo began to elaborate the theory of papal monarchy that enabled his successors to claim spiritual sovereignty over all Christians, including rulers, and to assume the fatherly title of papa. The issue of sovereignty became urgent in the next century with the arrival of the Lombards or Longobards (the Long Beards, from their custom of not shaving), who came into Italy in A.D. 568 and established an independent kingdom with its capital at Pavia. Their name lives on in the modern northern region of Lombardy, where they first settled. They practiced Arianism, a form of Christianity considered heretical and therefore unacceptable to Pope Gregory I (590–604), who organized a campaign to convert them. But their conversion was only partial, and the Lombards, as the dominant power in the peninsula, continued to pose a threat to the papacy. Fearful of Lombard power, Gregory’s successors called in the Franks. Their king, Pepin the Short (751–68), defeated the Lombards and ceded their territory to the pope, thus laying the foundation of the Papal States. From the political confusion of the eighth century, a low point in the history of Italy, came the temporal power of the popes, which lasted until 1870. Their defeat by Pepin notwithstanding, the Lombards remained a thorn in the side of popes, who then called in Pepin’s son Charlemagne. Charlemagne defeated the Lombards decisively in 774 and became the real power in Italy. Now dependent on Frankish power for military protection, the popes in turn sought to increase the Franks’ dependence on the church as the only institution that could impart legitimacy to their rule. On Christmas Day of the year 800 Pope Leo I placed the imperial crown on Charlemagne’s head and anointed him emperor. The Holy Roman Empire born on that day lasted in name until 1806, when it was abolished by Napoleon I as a meaningless relic. For much of its millennial history, however, the Holy Roman Empire was far from meaningless. Emperors claimed sovereignty over parts of Italy by virtue of the title and sent armies to enforce their claim. Thus the papal government, theoretically the most international but in reality the most Italian of all the governments in the peninsula, faced a serious 7

8 Italy

dilemma. As the governing body of the Catholic Church, the papacy identified with the Holy Roman Empire, which was in theory coterminous with the world of Catholic Christianity. In theory there was no conflict, for emperors wielded secular power, which they were expected to use in defense of the church, and popes wielded spiritual power, which was meant to secure the salvation of souls. But the distinction broke down in practice, as popes and emperors quarreled over issues that were both secular and spiritual. The thorniest issue was the appointment (investiture) of bishops, who were simultaneously religious and secular figures with spiritual and administrative duties. As a government based on Italian soil, jealous of its autonomy, and convinced that the secular power it exercised in Italy was essential to the fulfillment of its spiritual mission everywhere, the papacy resented any authority, including the imperial one, that claimed sovereignty in the peninsula. Yet it could not do without secular help, and often called on outside powers to extricate itself from its difficulties in Italy. The Renaissance historian Niccolò Machiavelli focused on the secular aspects of papal policy when he argued that the papacy was responsible for the miseries and indignities that Italians suffered at the hands of foreigners. The judgment was unjust because all Italian states looked to outside powers when it was in their interest to do so. The problem that Machiavelli saw was rooted not in papal policy, but in the peculiar course of Italy’s historical development. The German emperors Frederick II (1220–50) and Manfred (1258–66) were the last to attempt to impose some degree of political unity on the peninsula. After their defeat, city rivalries, factional strife, and murderous politics divided the peninsula into warring states for centuries to come. The so-called Age of the Communes (1000–1300) was a period of internal warfare and political chaos out of which emerged, painfully and paradoxically, the mercantile classes, economic connections, and political institutions of the Renaissance period (1300–1500). While other European countries moved toward centralized monarchy, Italians settled into an arrangement of competing regional states.

R ENAISSANCE STATES AND S OCIETY The largest and most populous of the regional states was the Kingdom of Naples. It had a population of about 1 million around 1500 and 2.1 million in 1595; it covered most of the southern part of the peninsula and the island of Sicily. It stood at the crossroads of Europe, but was never able to take full advantage of its central location in the Mediterranean world. A convenient passageway between the Near East and northern Europe, it was coveted by every power with imperial ambitions. The French Angevins ruled it until 1282 as a united “Kingdom of Sicily.” After more than 200 years of war and complicated dynastic successions, during which the mainland monarchs lost the island, island and mainland were reunited in 1504 under Spanish rule. For the next century and a half the Spanish rulers governed the still theoretically separate kingdoms of Naples and Sicily through their viceroys, who tried with limited success to curb the power of independent barons, kept brigandage in check, built a sizable army and navy, and appointed administrators loyal to the Crown. The level of internal violence declined, native industries prospered, and population grew. By the end of the 16th century the kingdom had a population of 2.1 million, and Naples, with a population of over 200,000, was the secondlargest city in Europe, exceeded only by Paris in size and splendor. But Spanish rule was not without drawbacks: It limited the autonomy of the kingdom, introduced the Inquisition, expelled Jews, taxed heavily, and generally hindered the expansion of trade. The cities of southern Italy were already lagging behind those of the north in trade at the start of the 16th century, and the gap widened under Spanish administration. The Southern Question has many components. Its roots predate the unification of Italy in the 19th century, when it became a national issue. Historians no longer contend, as they once did, that Spanish rule was solely responsible for the economic and civic backwardness of the South. But the Spanish rulers did expect much from the possession that they regarded as the jewel of the crown. It was a strategic outpost that protected Spain from the Muslim Turks advancing in the Mediterranean. Spain therefore demanded discipline and obedience from its Italian subjects and expected Naples to contribute significantly to the costs of war. The feudal nobility resisted efforts to centralize the administration with legal maneuvers that created an impossibly complex body of law. Southern jurisprudence was born of the effort to protect local autonomies. The Masaniello revolt of 1647 saw nobility and populace working together to restrain

10 Italy

the powers of royal officials. The result was large government that could not act, and a sluggish economy in which an overgrown capital stifled the growth of other urban centers. While other Italian states forged ahead in banking, manufacturing, and trade, the Kingdom of Naples remained primarily agricultural. In the Italian state system, Naples was the giant with feet of clay. The Papal States, or the States of the Church as they were formally known before 1815, were an agglomeration of territories under the loose control of the papal bureaucracy in Rome. The nobility of the Papal States, like that of Naples, consisted of families with historical roots in their territories, jealous of their prerogatives and independence, supportive of papal authority only if given a free hand in their ancestral possessions. Unlike the Neapolitan aristocracy, they did not provide soldiers and civil servants for the government, for the papacy relied heavily on mercenary troops brought in from other parts of the Catholic world and on clergymen to fill public offices. The presence of the papal court brought pilgrims and business to Rome, but heavy reliance on that premodern equivalent of the tourist trade may not have been good for the economy as a whole. Taxpayers resented the presence of a large nonproductive clergy. Popes and cardinals were great patrons of the arts, but they were also great consumers of revenue. Renaissance popes turned Rome into an impressive showcase, behind which there was little economic substance. On one extreme was the opulence of the churches and palaces of the city, on the other the shabby, dirty, and unsanitary quarters and miserable dwellings of the populace. There was little in between; the middle classes that drove the economy in other parts of Italy were the weakest part of papal society. More complicated political and territorial arrangements prevailed north of the Papal States. The South was monarchist, the North and center a complicated mix of dynastic states and republics. To be sure, it was not always easy to tell one from the other. Republics were supposedly governed by elected officials in the public interest. Dynastic states, also called principalities because their rulers were princes without royal titles, were ruled by a family. In principalities power was hereditary and princes ruled with the support of other powerful families and groups. Fifteenth-century Florence was a republic in name but a dynastic state in fact because the Medici family ruled by virtue of their wealth and connections. Genoa, Lucca, and Venice were republics, but the majority of their citizens had little say in the affairs of the state. These “aristocratic republics” were governed by their upper classes, which excluded everyone else from public office. State rivalries were the norm regardless of the term of government. The Florentine state showed little interest in expanding territorially beyond the region of Tuscany that was its natural locale because Florentine power rested on banking, trade, and diplomacy. Milan, a dynastic state ruled successively by the Visconti and Sforza families, was expansionist and a threat to its neighbors. Most threatened was the Republic of Venice, an imperial power with far-flung interests in the eastern Mediterranean that was torn by conflicting commitments at home and abroad. Florence, Milan, and Venice were the major players surrounded by lesser states like Parma, Ferrara, and Urbino. Although territorially insignificant, these small states played a large role culturally and

Renaissance States and Society 11

politically, thanks to the ambition and vision of their ruling dynasties. The culture of humanism was born and flourished in the courts of Renaissance princes. How these states fared in the course of the 16th century is a subject of debate. The shifting of trade routes to the Atlantic seaboard, the rise of wealthy banking families in Germany, the consolidation of national monarchies in Spain, France, and England suggest that Italy was relegated to the periphery of European power. But the decline, if that is what it was, is not easily measurable. Italy’s population grew from 10 million to 12 million in the course of the 16th century, while Europe as a whole experienced a comparable growth from about 80 million to 100 million. In 1600 the Italian peninsula was the most densely populated region of Europe. After a relative decline in the course of the 17th century, Italy’s population resumed a rate of growth comparable to the overall European rate in the 18th century. Italian banking, trade, and manufacturing had done well for most of the 16th century, as Venetian shipping and Genoese

Lorenzo de’ Medici, prominent member of the Medici dynasty (Library of Congress)

12 Italy

banking held on to their previous shares of business and were joined by new trading ports like Livorno and Ancona. Silk manufacturing prospered, except in Venice, and Italians were uncontested masters in the production of luxury goods, including brocades, crystal, laces, leather goods, and jewelry. There is no clear evidence of steady economic decline until the 1630s. The case that accounts for Italy’s political decline rests on the dramatic evidence of the first major foreign invasion of the peninsula by the French in 1494. The Florentine historian Francesco Guicciardini opened his account of events in Italy from 1490 to 1534 with an idyllic description of the state of Italy before the invasion and warned of the dire consequences of foreign rule. Writing in the late 1530s, Guicciardini saw the future in terms of the most recent events. The invasion of 1494 opened the way to other invasions by French and Spanish armies. During the so-called Wars of Italy that stretched from the invasion of 1494 to the Treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis in 1559, Italy was the “battleground of Europe.” The original invasion upset the approximate balance of power among the Italian states achieved in 1454–55 with the Peace of Lodi and other diplomatic agreements. After 1494 the Italian states could no longer regulate their own affairs. That fundamental shift may have been masked by the successes of individuals and families. Negotiated agreements and advantageous marriages served the Medici and Farnese families well. Italian advisers and diplomats held positions of power at the French and Spanish courts. Artists who could no longer find commissions at home found them abroad, as far as England and Russia. The military traditions that Italians had developed in the course of centuries of domestic warfare lived on in the deeds of latter-day condottieri, who served with distinction in the armies of foreign powers. Papal diplomacy was sometimes called upon to settle international disputes. In 1571 the Venetian navy played the leading role in the battle of Lepanto, which halted the Turkish advance in the Mediterranean. The consolidation of dynastic rule that was a feature of 16th-century political life everywhere in Europe from England to Russia occurred in Italy at the level of regional states. The Medici added Siena to their other Tuscan possessions in the 1550s. The process of dynastic concentration developed most notably in what until then had been the most backward and problematic of the Italian states. The possessions of the House of Savoy, tucked away in the Alps where France, Italy, and Switzerland meet, began to merge into something resembling a modern state under the leadership of the ambitious and opportunistic Duke Emanuel Philibert (1553–80). The duke and his successors encouraged the military traditions and vocation of the Savoyard aristocracy, built up a small but reliable army, and employed it profitably. Blocked in one direction by the greater power of France, the Sabaudi, as Italians call the members of this dynasty, turned their attention to the fertile Italian plains below. Emanuel Philibert set the premises for the process of expansion by marriage, war, and diplomacy that led to the unification of Italy three centuries later. While it is possible to overstate the case for Italy’s precipitous political decline in the 16th century, there is no doubt that the decline was ultimately real. The loss of political independence was sanctioned by the consolidation of

Renaissance States and Society 13

Spanish rule in Naples and Milan in the course of the 17th century. Military skills fell into disuse in part because they were discouraged by foreign governments. Like the navigators who sought to make their fortunes in the service of countries positioned to take advantage of the new ocean routes, Italian condottieri of the 16th and 17th centuries found it more remunerative to serve in the armies of the Bourbons and Habsburgs. By the 18th century even a normally peace-loving writer like Giuseppe Parini lamented that Italian men had lost the discipline of military life. The stereotypical image of the upper-class Italian male in the 18th century was that of the effete artist or courtier. The 17th century saw the flight of capital from investments in trade and manufacturing into land and agriculture, a phenomenon described by some historians as the “refeudalization” of the Italian economy. Wealthy families in Venice, Florence, Milan, and other cities became landowners interested primarily in the state of agriculture and social relations in the countryside. There were agricultural innovations, the most significant being the introduction of new crops like maize and rice, which joined chestnuts as staples of mass consumption. Wealthy Italians enjoyed a more varied diet, but meat consumption was low for everyone by north European standards. Much of the wealth produced in the countryside was consumed in the cities, where the wealthy maintained their palatial residences, employed large numbers of servants, and spent lavishly on entertainments. The populations of Milan, Naples, Palermo, Rome, Venice, and other large cities grew in the 17th and 18th centuries, while the populations of smaller cities and towns declined or remained static. The latter were città del silenzio (cities of silence), sleepy provincial capitals stuck in the unchanging routine of centuries. The impressions of travelers confirm that northern Europeans came to regard Italy as an economic backwater, and historians generally regard the 17th and 18th centuries as marked by a growing gap between Italy and western Europe. The gap was less evident in cultural matters. Throughout the period that historians call “early modern” (1500–1800), Italy experienced the same cultural developments as the rest of Europe. The first in order of time was the process of religious reform known variously as the Counter-Reformation, Catholic Reformation, or Catholic Reform. To a degree, the Catholic Reformation accomplished in Italy what secular governments accomplished in other parts of Europe. Sixteenth-century European societies experienced political centralization and greater government control over the activities of individuals and groups. This process was tied everywhere to the imposition of religious uniformity, for there was a general assumption that there could be no political and social stability without religious uniformity. Italy is a particular case of this general trend. There was no central government authority in Italy to impose religious uniformity as there was in England, France, and Spain, but the influence and power of the Catholic Church cut across the political boundaries that divided the states of the peninsula. Pope Paul III (1534–49) began the process of reform. The Council of Trent formulated the new rules that tightened clerical discipline, required the clergy to keep vital statistics for their parishes, regulated religious orders and lay confraternities, reformed the practice of confession, increased

14 Italy

clerical influence over the laity, and controlled the expression of ideas. The principal tools at its disposal were the Inquisition, the Index, and the Jesuit Order. The archbishop of Milan, Carlo Borromeo, provided the practical model of reform adopted throughout Catholic Europe. Long and controversial, the process of reform caught on slowly. The reforms were essentially complete by the beginning of the 17th century. Even the republic of Venice, the state most jealous of its autonomy and most disposed to resist the encroachments of papal power, eventually fell into line. The Catholic character of Italian culture was definitely consolidated by the reforms of the 16th century as Protestant sympathizers were driven away from the peninsula and dissent was rooted out. There were some spectacular defections to the Protestant camp, but the “heretics” were relatively few. There were probably no more than 300 executions in all of Italy resulting from actions of the Inquisition, a tiny number compared to the numbers in England, France, Spain, or the Netherlands. Jews were confined to ghettoes rather than executed, expelled, or forced to convert. The forcible repression of the Waldensians by the rulers of Savoy in 1655 was the exception to the rule, and it was followed by grudging toleration of the surviving minority. To keep themselves busy, Inquisitors turned their attention to ferreting out cases of magic and witchcraft, but here too the emphasis was on prevention and correction rather than persecution. Repression was relatively mild, perhaps because the Italian church felt secure. The splendors of Baroque art were the outward expression of the church’s assertiveness and self-confidence. War and disease were far more serious dangers for most Italians than religious persecution. In the case of war, Italians benefited from the Pax Hispanica that followed the end of the Wars of Italy. They were spared the worst devastation that the Thirty Years’ War (1618–48) inflicted on other parts of Europe, notably Germany, where no great power was present to keep out marauding armies. The threat of war was mostly internal as Spain’s many commitments prevented it from policing the peninsula effectively. The Castro Wars (1642–49) between the Papal States and the Duchy of Parma over possession of the grainproducing town of Castro in northern Latium was only the most visible of the many obscure conflicts between neighbors that broke out in the course of the 17th century. These local conflicts compounded the tensions and fears aroused by the plague epidemics in 1575–77, 1629–31, and 1656–57. Complete figures are not available, but a few examples suffice to indicate the lethal impact of these epidemics. The epidemic of 1575–77 killed 50,000 of Venice’s 200,000 inhabitants; the plague of 1629–31 carried off half of Milan’s population of 120,000; in Genoa, 55,000 of its 73,000 perished in the epidemic of 1575–77, which also carried off about one-third of Naples’ 300,000 inhabitants. No wonder that the 16th and 17th centuries are sometimes referred to as the age of saints. There were many reasons to look for saints. While the church looked for heroic saints in the fight against Protestantism, ordinary people looked for saints who showed compassion and possessed healing powers.

S ECULAR C ULTURE IN THE A GE OF THE E NLIGHTENMENT Secular thought had its own champions. Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) laid the groundwork for modern science. Though the Catholic Church condemned him for his astronomical findings, the combination of mathematical speculation and experimental verification that he practiced is at the core of modern scientific investigation. He did not have many followers in Italy, but those who took up his work contributed to the solution of practical problems of land reclamation, road construction, and the study of anatomy, biology, botany, and medicine. These were the areas of strength of Italian science in the so-called forgotten centuries. Other figures less known than Galileo contributed to the vitality of Italian culture. Francesco Redi (1626–98) was a pioneer scientist who revolutionized the practice of medicine. Lodovico Muratori (1672–1750) anchored the study of history to the use of documents. Giambattista Vico (1668–1744) stressed the fundamental role of culture in the historical process, identified language as the basis of culture, and formulated a comprehensive theory of historical development that anticipated 19th-century romanticism. With these figures we stand on the threshold of the Enlightenment, the cultural revolution that changed the European cultural landscape in the course of the 18th century. Confident that reason and science are the means to control nature and reform society, the Enlightenment is always traced to English, Scottish, French, and German thought, but Renaissance humanism also challenged traditional notions of divine power and Christian resignation and expressed confidence in reason and free will. Italy’s cultural elites responded with enormous interest to ideas that came from abroad because they were the direct heirs of humanist culture. What they received from abroad via correspondence, publications, travel, and the activities of academies they elaborated in light of their own concerns. Freemasonry was a semisecret society that brought together members of the educated middle and upper classes in a common fight against the forces of obscurantism, superstition, and popular religion. In Italy, that meant taking on the Catholic Church. In northern Italy, Francesco Algarotti (1712–64) was the indefatigable and most successful promoter of the new culture. In Milan, Pietro Verri (1728–97) headed a group of intellectuals who pushed for political and economic reforms. There, Cesare Beccaria

16 Italy

(1738–94) won fame for his championing of penal law reforms, and Giuseppe Parini (1729–99) criticized moral laxness and corruption and praised the virtues of honesty, frugality, and simplicity. The école de Milan was recognized in France as a distinct version of the new culture. Outside Milan, Luigi Galvani (1737–98) and Alessandro Volta (1745–1827) carried scientific research into the new fields of electricity and magnetism. In the Kingdom of Naples, Pietro Giannone (1676–1748) attacked clerical privilege, Antonio Genovesi (1713–69) and Ferdinando Galiani (1728–87) revised free-trade theories in light of the kingdom’s special interests and needs. What distinguished the figures of the Italian Enlightenment was a pronounced interest in practical reforms and a relative indifference to theoretical speculation. In the 1750s the Republic of Lucca published the first Italian edition of the French Encyclopédie, the principal propagator of administrative, economic, and technological reforms. Intellectuals were not the only ones affected by the desire to study, understand, and repair. Governments also responded, hesitantly and cautiously at first. Rulers and ministers considered proposals to improve the machinery of government, expand trade and production, promote education, reduce crime, eliminate food shortages, and alleviate poverty. The need for reform was broadly understood, but Enlightenment ideas circulated initially among the most educated members of society. Reformers knew that they could not count on popular support for avant-garde ideas of change. They relied instead on the initiative of monarchs attuned to the new culture. The centralization of power in the hands of reforming rulers, the so-called enlightened despots, was a prerequisite for change, and the more absolute the monarch the better. Peace was another prerequisite, and Italy was fortunate enough to enjoy such a period of peace from the end of the War of the Austrian Succession in 1748 to the French invasion of 1796. The governments least interested in reform were those of the aristocratic republics. There were few reforms in the republics of Venice, Genoa, and Lucca, where there were no monarchs to challenge the power of entrenched oligarchies. The most energetic efforts at reform were made in the Habsburg possession of Lombardy, in Tuscany where the House of Habsburg-Lorraine had succeeded the extinct Medicis in 1737, and in Naples and Parma, ruled by the Bourbons. It was the governments of these states that proceeded most energetically to enact the reforms that are associated with 18th-century enlightened monarchy. The monarchs of these states appointed ministers with the vision and energy necessary to reform a system of power that went back to medieval times. The reformers attacked the “liberties” of entrenched groups that were now denounced as undeserved privileges. Nobility, papacy, clergy, religious orders, and guilds were the targets of their attacks. Absolute monarchs were the new agents of change, and the more absolute their power the greater the scope of reform. In Lombardy under Empress Maria Theresa (1740–80) and her son Joseph II (1780–90), the nobility was initially won over by promises that reforms would not threaten their traditional prerogatives. The government cautiously carried out a land census (1718–59), encouraged agriculture, and enacted administrative and penal reforms. These

Secular Culture in the Age of the Enlightenment 17

attempts to obtain accurate information on the ownership of land alarmed landowners large and small. Peasants, weapons in hand, often chased the census takers away. In Tuscany, the governments of Francis of Lorraine (1737–65) and Peter Leopold (1765–90) enacted trade reforms, lowered tolls, abolished guilds, and toyed with religious reform. In Naples, under Charles of Bourbon (1734–59) and in the first years of the reign of his son Ferdinand IV (1759–1825), the government centralized the administration, abolished local autonomies, and reduced clerical privileges. In the Papal States, where four separate popes reigned from 1740 to 1796, there were only half-hearted efforts at reform and little continuity from one pontificate to the next. Enlightenment popes were cultured gentlemen and generous patrons of the arts. Theater, literature, and the arts flourished in 18th-century Rome, but not political reform. What reforms there were dealt with land reclamation, the collection of taxes, and disbursement of public funds. In the Kingdom of Sardinia the rulers of the House of Savoy persevered in their policy of transforming the nobility into servants of the Crown by offering them rewards and careers in the army and public administration. Intellectuals fled the kingdom, some in fear for their lives for having offended the rulers with their ideas of change.

T HE F RENCH R EVOLUTION AND N APOLEON 1789–1815 Interest in reform abated everywhere when it became clear that tampering with government and society risked ushering in revolution. The fear was present all along, but intensified after 1789 when popular revolution actually broke out in France. There was clearly a downside to the power of absolute monarchs that alarmed even the supporters of reform from the top. In the early 1790s even a staunch proponent of reform like the Milanese, Pietro Verri, concluded that it was best to put limits on the power of monarchs. His reasoning was similar to that of the American colonists who said no taxation without representation. The initial response to the news that revolution had broken out in France in 1789 was therefore sympathetic. Calling monarchs to account was something that informed Italians could understand. But fear of the mob soon replaced the fear of royal power. Poor harvests in the late 1780s, the enclosure of common lands, loss of communal rights, abolition of guilds, rising prices, and the proliferation of bandits and beggars created discontent everywhere. The years of reform had primed expectations by whetting the appetite for change and by the dislocations and hardships that change always entails. The initial mood of mild sympathy for the French Revolution changed to hostility when the import of what was happening in France struck home. The abolition of feudal privileges scared the Italian nobility, the execution of the French monarchs alienated moderate opinion, and the attacks on the French clergy angered the devout. Reformers wanted controlled change, an educated public, and the exclusion of the masses from public life. After 1792 only the most radical intellectuals in Italy sided with the French revolutionaries. They were to be found in schools, secret societies, and the academies. Unlike the French revolutionaries, they lacked government support and a popular following. These Italian Jacobins believed in liberty, equality, and fraternity, and were ready to welcome the French as liberators if they brought revolution with them. The French army that invaded Italy in the spring of 1796 came to a land where administrative and economic reforms had shaken the authority of throne and altar, and educated elites were ready for change. The invading 18

The French Revolution and Napoleon 19

troops were led by the young and dynamic Napoleon Bonaparte, at age 28 the youngest general in the French army. Of Italian ancestry and fluent in Italian, he was born and bred in Corsica where his family had settled. His quick rise to prominence was due to the Revolution, which he personified. He was an innovator, compulsively driven to change, but not a revolutionary. His attitude was similar to that of an enlightened absolute monarch who distrusted popular initiatives. Beyond that, there was boundless personal ambition and craving for military distinction and glory. Italy was to be his launching pad to greater things. He knew how to motivate. His soldiers, ill-clad and famished, were more interested in booty than in justice, and Bonaparte pointed them toward the fertile plains and cities of Lombardy that lay within their grasp. The Piedmontese army that stood in his way did not pose much of an obstacle, nor did the stronger Austrian forces that he met and routed. Beyond that there was trouble. The depredations and atrocities committed by his soldiers alienated the clergy, peasants, and other ordinary folk who were their victims. That inauspicious start did not dampen Jacobin enthusiasm for the “liberators.” The fracture between pro-French and anti-French Italians introduced a new element of civil discord in the body politic. Bonaparte had a strong proprietary attitude toward Italy, but the French government to which Napoleon was accountable had its own reasons for wanting northern Italy in French hands, for that land was strategically important and rich enough to finance the war that was also being fought on the Rhine. In the first six months after his arrival, Bonaparte sent home the enormous sum of 58 million francs, making the government in Paris financially dependent on the Italian revenues and on himself as their chief provider. Strategically, northern Italy in Austrian hands was a threat to the security of France. In French hands, it was an ideal outpost for defense and offense. After buying off further Austrian resistance by giving up to them the Republic of Venice, Bonaparte proceeded to change the map of the peninsula. In January 1797 he set up the Cispadane Republic in the territories of Parma, Modena, and Bologna, and carved the sister Transpadane Republic out of Lombard territory. In July 1797 he merged them to form the Cisalpine Republic, which also included the formerly papal territories of Bologna, Ferrara, Forlì, and Ravenna. Jacobin minorities seized power in Genoa, where they installed the democratic Ligurian Republic, in Rome where they abolished papal rule and set up the Roman Republic, and in Naples where, the royal court having escaped to the safety of Sicily, they established the Parthenopean Republic. In a matter of months, Napoleon had changed a political map that had endured for centuries. These republics set a precedent for further change. In 1798–99 Russo-Austrian troops regained control of most of northern Italy while Napoleon was away on his Egyptian campaign. After returning to Italy in 1800, and defeating the Austrians decisively at the Battle of Marengo, Napoleon restored the Cisalpine Republic, renaming it the Italian Republic in January 1802. The republic was to remain unconditionally loyal to France, but Napoleon flattered Italians by calling them “the first people of Europe” and urging them to fulfill their destiny as a united people behind his leadership. The promise of careers was an

20 Italy

added attraction. Francesco Melzi d’Eril (1753–1816), a moderate Lombard who would have preferred to serve a monarch but was willing to go along with a republic, was in charge of day-to-day affairs. The Italian Republic had its own regular army, the administration staffed mostly by Italians. It brought together 3 million Italians who had previously lived under different laws. Its green, white, and red flag was modeled after the blue, white, and red tricolor of revolutionary France. It sent a mixed message, for it stood simultaneously for Italian independence and subordination to France, but in time it came to be associated with national independence only. With one important modification to acknowledge the role of the royal House of Savoy, it became the flag of unified Italy. Many historians see Napoleon as deliberately encouraging the growth of an Italian national consciousness, but there is little evidence that he envisaged or wanted a truly independent and united Italy. All his initiatives and policies, from road construction to the structuring of the economy, aimed at establishing French hegemony. At the height of his power all of northwestern Italy as far south as Rome, as well as Istria and the Dalmatian coast, were provinces of France. In February 1806 Napoleon’s brother Joseph Bonaparte became king of Naples after the French had driven the Bourbons off the mainland and into Sicily for the second time to seek the protection of the British navy. The flamboyant Joachim Murat, Napoleon’s brother-in-law and a dashing figure who appealed to the popular imagination, followed Joseph on the Neapolitan throne in June 1808. Murat did call for Italian independence, but he did so in extremis when he had no longer anything to lose. Still, thanks to Murat’s late conversion to the cause of Italian independence, in southern Italy murattismo came to stand for national independence. On March 15, 1805, after he had been crowned emperor of the French, Napoleon replaced the Italian Republic in northern Italy with a larger Kingdom of Italy. The Italian throne belonged constitutionally to Napoleon and his direct male descendants, but Napoleon did not concern himself with ordinary administration. He did not visit Italy after 1805 and left the state in the hands of his stepson, Eugène de Beauharnais, as his viceroy. There was a legislative body, and the administration, modeled on the centralized administration of France, was in Italian hands. The Kingdom of Italy was expected to be an active participant in the affairs of the Napoleonic empire. For this to happen it needed a sizable army. At its largest, it consisted of some 80,000–90,000 troops. It is estimated that in the course of its existence from 1805 to 1814 the Kingdom of Italy provided Napoleon with some 200,000 soldiers, by far the largest contribution of any of Napoleon’s subject states. Thousands of Italian officers demobilized after the defeat of Napoleon in 1815 joined the movement for national unification. Napoleon, who understood the power of patriotism, did make a contribution to the movement for national unification after all. Ambition and the quagmire of Italian politics drew Napoleon deeper into the affairs of the peninsula. He made peace with the pope in February 1797 (Treaty of Tolentino) after taking over the northern provinces of the Papal States. But papal hostility, the use of papal territory by his enemies, and the political intrigues of Italian Jacobins persuaded him to resume military operations in

The French Revolution and Napoleon 21

January 1798. A convinced atheist who regarded papal authority as a medieval relic, he had the aged and ailing Pope Pius VI removed to France. That move transformed an otherwise unremarkable pope into a martyr and reinforced the image of the revolutionaries as a godless people. The introduction of compulsory military conscription and the efficient collection of taxes did the rest. Disaffection with the French and their local supporters was behind the popular resistance and irregular warfare that plagued the French in the South. The most serious resistance occurred in 1799 when peasant bands led by Cardinal Fabrizio Ruffo and the outlaw Fra Diavolo rose up against the French and their local supporters. On a lesser scale, the same occurred in 1806–08. These were struggles without quarter, marked by unspeakable atrocities on both sides, that introduced a new type of warfare pitting irregular bands against regular troops. Guerrilla is a Spanish word, but the French encountered that type of warfare in southern Italy before being discomfited by it in Spain. The French prevailed in Italy with superior resources, better organization, and the support of critical sectors of society. Public works, administrative reforms, rewards and careers for those qualified to take advantage of opportunities in government and public administration showed the progressive side of French rule. After 1805 the locus of war shifted to central Europe, and Italy enjoyed a few years of peace during which the Napoleonic governments of the peninsula concentrated on enacting reform. The construction of roads and canals, the channeling of rivers, vast projects of urban renewal and land reclamation were the more visible signs of the dynamism of these Napoleonic regimes. In the Kingdom of Naples, the abolition of feudal privileges and usi civici (common rights to the land, which impeded land improvements) opened up new possibilities for those members of the middle classes who possessed capital and education. The adoption of the decimal system, of uniform weights, measures, and currencies, of the French civil code, and of uniform penal and commercial laws facilitated legal and business transactions. Most of these beneficial reforms were not rescinded by most post-Napoleonic governments. But their benefits were outweighed by the immediate burdens and impositions of Napoleonic government. Disaffection was on the rise when Napoleon entered the final round of wars that brought him and his system down in 1814–15. What people wanted most of all by then was an end to war, conscription, and high taxes.

T HE R ESTORATION 1815–1848 The aristocratic leaders of the anti-Napoleonic coalition who settled the affairs of Europe at the Congress of Vienna in 1814–15 brought to the table an agenda that had the double purpose of safeguarding the interests of their class and satisfying the yearning for peace shared by everyone after 25 bloody years of war and revolution. What the victorious allies proposed was an “alliance of throne and altar,” respect for traditional institutions and customs, and the cooperation of all conservative governments (the Concert of Europe) to prevent the recurrence of war and revolution. The logical corollary of that principle was the restoration of the papal monarchy and all other “legitimate” dynasties, meaning those deposed by Napoleon, as opposed to the “illegitimate” created by Napoleon. The principle of legitimacy was not extended to the aristocratic republics that had also been victims of Napoleon’s innovative zeal. Those republics became spoils of war. The territory of the Republic of Venice went to Austria and that of the Republic of Genoa to the Kingdom of Sardinia. The Republic of Lucca became the Duchy of Lucca, temporarily assigned to the Bourbons who had formerly ruled in Parma. Parma was assigned for the duration of her life to Napoleon’s second wife, Marie Louise, who was also the daughter of the Austrian emperor and needed a post suitable to her rank. Parma would revert to the Bourbons at her death, when Lucca would be joined to the Grand Duchy of Tuscany. The Este family returned to the duchy of Modena, the papacy to Rome, and the Neapolitan Bourbons to southern Italy and Sicily. The union of the two parts became official in 1816, and the state was officially renamed Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Italy’s territorial arrangements reflected more than the desire to restore legitimate monarchs to their thrones. Austria tightened its hold on Italy by incorporating both Lombardy and Venetia in its empire and gaining the right to garrison Parma and the papal towns of Ferrara and Ravenna. The annexation of the former Republic of Genoa by Piedmont-Sardinia could be seen as compensation to the House of Savoy for its loyalty to the conservative cause. Evicted from the continent by Napoleon, the court had retreated to the island of Sardinia to wait out the Napoleonic storm under the protection of the British navy. No dynasty seemed more conservative and less likely to countenance change than the House of Savoy. The annexation of Genoa strengthened this 22

The Restoration 23

supposed bulwark of conservatism, made it a more effective buffer state against France, and gave it better access to the sea. These territorial adjustments underline the fear of the conservative powers that France might slip into revolution again, attempt to export the revolution by force of arms, and plunge Europe into another round of wars. France was to be hemmed in in every way possible to prevent it from again threatening the peace and stability of the continent. The restoration of Bourbon rule in France in the person of Louis XVIII, France’s participation in the conservative Quadruple Alliance, and the strengthening of states bordering on France, including the Kingdom of Sardinia, were measures toward that end. The “Italian Question” featured prominently in the deliberations of the Congress because Italy was regarded as a potential trouble spot. Large numbers of Italians had supported the Napoleonic regimes, educated minorities had tasted power and aspired to careers in public administration, there were thousands of unemployed and disgruntled former Napoleonic officers, and the members of dozens of secret societies were eager to conspire. Austrian chancellor Prince Clemens von Metternich (1773–1859), the guiding spirit of the Congress of Vienna, was determined to hold these groups in check, but he also understood that the clock could not be turned back to prerevolutionary times. Keeping Italy calm was now Austria’s responsibility. Metternich’s strategy was to promote the kind of change that did not threaten Austrian hegemony. Administrative reforms to make government more efficient and equitable were acceptable, demands for independence and unity were not. It was at the Congress of Vienna that Metternich made his first references to Italy as a “geographic expression.” Italians, according to Metternich, were divided by cultural and historical differences so profound that it made no sense for them to aspire to independence and unity. The only thing they had in common was the shape of the boot; they were better off divided into separate states. For all his obduracy on the issues of Italian independence and unity, Metternich was too much the political realist to think that it was safe to ignore demands for change. He had no intention of relying solely on military power and repression to keep Italy under Austrian control. He therefore urged Italian rulers to adopt administrative reforms designed to allay discontent. The reforms that he urged on satellite governments were administrative in nature. Metternich called for equitable laws, an honest and efficient judiciary, fair taxation, sound fiscal policies, local self-government, regular consultation between the central government and local councils, careers open to talent, and measures to promote economic development. He was even willing to countenance expressions of cultural patriotism. It was fine for Italians to be proud of Dante as long as the pride was literary. What he did not want to encourage was an autonomous national movement or any concessions to the principle of constitutional monarchy, which he regarded as intrinsically revolutionary. Metternich’s concepts of reform were implemented most readily in the regions of Lombardy and Venetia, where Austria ruled directly because they were integral parts of the empire. The reforms worked best in Lombardy, where the capital city of Milan emerged after 1815 as an important publishing and cultural

24 Italy

center, a place where business, the applied sciences, and engineering flourished. Under Austrian rule Milan took on the role of business capital that it retains to this day. This is not to say that all was well. Austria taxed heavily, its trade policies favored other parts of the empire, and Italians were not favored in top administrative and military positions. Still, in the first half of the 19th century Lombardy was economically better off than any other region in Italy. Venetia did not fare as well, largely because of the mountainous nature of its territory, the impoverished state of its peasantry, the loss of trade, and competition from the port of Trieste. Venetians and Italians from the former Venetian territories of Istria and Dalmatia did well in the Austrian navy, where Italian was the official language. In the states where Austria ruled by proxy, there was less commitment to reform but considerable tolerance. Parma under the easygoing rule of Marie Louise allowed some freedom of expression; the presence of many charities alleviated the plight of the poor. Tuscany was relatively well off, thanks to its prosperous agriculture and the progressive legislation that dated back to prerevolutionary times. Tuscans welcomed back the House of Habsburg-Lorraine, few opposed the government, much road construction went on, and a relaxed atmosphere prevailed in Florence, where wags said that the only secret society was the Society of Pleasures, open to men and women. That was not entirely correct. An efficient police apparatus kept close watch on the activities of people whose political views were suspect, but the police acted only in extreme cases. Political satire flourished and served as a safety valve. Florence was home to serious intellectuals and reformers, who rallied around Gian Pietro Vieusseux and the review Antologia. The Tuscan government was not liberal, but it was shrewd enough to understand that systematic repression was bad for both the government and the economy. Opposition to Metternich’s ideal of “administrative monarchy” came from other Italian states where Austrian influence was indirect, and the opponents were both liberals and conservatives. In the small but strategically located duchy of Modena, Duke Francis IV, a staunch supporter of royal absolutism, was not averse to intriguing with liberals for the sake of territorial gain. In the Papal States, the secretary of state, Cardinal Ercole Consalvi, tried to follow Metternich’s advice, but was frustrated by clerical ultraconservatives opposed to his plans to open the public administration to the laity. The clergy’s monopoly of public offices would prove to be a major destabilizing factor for the Papal States. Consalvi, who resented Austrian interference in papal affairs, was also determined to show the world that the pope could rule without outside help. Caught between two fires, he pleased neither liberals nor conservatives. The revolutions of 1821 increased conservative fears of revolution, and the election of Pope Leo XII (1823–29) put an end to all efforts at compromise. From then on, papal policy was more conservative than Austrian policy and regarded all efforts at reform as dangerous concessions to the spirit of revolution. A figure similar to Consalvi guided government policy in the first five years of the Restoration in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. As chief adviser to the king, Luigi de’ Medici worked to reconcile supporters of the restored Bourbons

The Restoration 25

and of the deposed Napoleonic monarchs. He allowed Neapolitans who had served the Napoleonic governments of Murat and Joseph Bonaparte to retain their posts in the army and public administration. He extended the Napoleonic legislation to Sicily, and outlawed all secret societies, including ultraconservative ones opposed to his policy of the “amalgam.” Medici did give censorship powers to church authorities, restored religious congregations abolished under Napoleon, and gave ecclesiastical courts sole jurisdiction over the clergy, provisions that pleased conservatives. As had happened in Rome to Consalvi, Medici’s moderate policies won him few friends; they were thoroughly compromised when, in spite of his efforts, revolution broke out in 1821. Naples’ reliance on Austria increased after the revolution, and so did its conservatism in domestic matters. Neapolitan conservatism was reinforced by fear of liberal England, which dominated the Mediterranean and was suspected of encouraging autonomist sentiments in Sicily. In 1812 the English had prevailed on a reluctant King Ferdinand I to issue a constitution that limited his power and made him accountable to an elected legislature. Such precedents were not forgotten; their memory helped drive Naples closer to Austria and Russia, the latter eager to strengthen its position in the Mediterranean with closer ties to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. After 1821 political repression increased, the press was tightly controlled, secular education discouraged, enterprise in business was politically suspect. The repressive atmosphere did not encourage economic growth. Ironically, the state that in the end proved to be most anti-Austrian was the one that was the most conservative in 1815. In 1789–99 the Kingdom of Sardinia bore the brunt of French expansion, eventually losing its independence and all of its mainland provinces to France. King Victor Emmanuel I had fought against Napoleon and lost, but he was not a vindictive man. He banned from court those aristocratic families who had supported Napoleon, but eventually relented. There was no doubt that he dreaded revolution, an obsessive fear reflected also in the writings of one of his diplomats, the ultraroyalist Joseph de Maistre, who was ambassador to Russia from 1803 to 1817. Restored to his possessions and given Genoa as a reward for his loyalty, the king was determined to do all in his power to prevent the recurrence of revolution. He would purge the public administration, diplomatic corps, army, and schools of all Napoleonic appointees. His ministers consulted the court almanac of 1798 to ascertain who held what positions before the French had annexed Piedmont and Savoy. It is alleged, perhaps incorrectly, that the king even considered demolishing a “Jacobin bridge” built by the French. In reality the purge was selective, public servants who were purged at first were soon reinstated, and aristocratic families who had served Napoleon did not suffer for long. These included the family of Camillo Benso, count of Cavour, the future first prime minister of unified Italy. If fear of revolution was Victor Emmanuel’s first passion, hostility toward Austria was a close second. The king confronted the traditional dilemma of his dynasty: how to pursue an expansionist foreign policy while retaining the traditional structures of the state. The territorial ambitions that could only be satisfied in the Lombard plains at the expense of Austria made the Kingdom of

26 Italy

Sardinia an uncertain member of the Concert of Europe and a distrusted ally of Austria. Officers who had served under Napoleon kept their positions in the army, including the future king Charles Albert, who would play a key role in the movement for national independence. The central issue in the affairs of Piedmont-Sardinia after 1815 was how to reconcile territorial expansionism with political conservatism. In the years of peace that followed the Congress of Vienna, neither the temperamentally cautious Victor Emmanuel I nor his successor Charles Felix had opportunities to engage in military adventures. Any thoughts they may have had of challenging Austrian hegemony in Italy were quickly dispelled by the outbreak of revolution in 1821, when some members of the aristocracy and army officers joined the revolutionaries. The army was considered a mainstay of absolute monarchy, the others being the Catholic Church and the peasantry. The defection of some officers, including Charles Albert, who was serving as royal regent in the temporary absence of Victor Emmanuel I, was a traumatic event. The king resigned the throne in favor of his brother Charles Felix, who carried out a thorough purge of the army, civil service, the schools, and the press. A stickler for legality, Charles Felix took a personal interest in the campaign to root out dissent. The clergy, on which he relied to prevent the spread of dangerous ideas, gained unprecedented influence at court and in the schools. In the 10 years of Charles Felix’s reign, Piedmont-Sardinia was a docile member of Metternich’s order, but ironically the seeds of change were planted by the Congress of Vienna itself when it decided to award Genoa to the Piedmontese. That decision greatly complicated the social and political dynamics of the state. Although far from the glory days of its power as a maritime republic, Genoa was still an urban and mercantile center of regional significance. It revered its republican traditions, had an assertive middle class of professionals and businessmen, valued its autonomy, and was anti-Piedmontese at heart. The militarism of the Piedmontese court, the aristocratic tone of Piedmontese social life, and the agrarian basis of the Piedmontese economy clashed with everything that Genoa stood for. The court understood the difficulties it faced in dealing with this city and went out of its way to win acceptance of Piedmontese rule. It encouraged the expansion of Genoese shipping, which became active in the waters of North and South America in the 1820s. The navy patrolled the waters to protect Genoese ships from pirates, which still infested the waters of the Mediterranean, and attacked their bases in North Africa. These and other measures designed to facilitate business had a positive effect in the long run, but tensions were still high in the 1820s when Genoa became a center of political conspiracy. One of the conspirators was a young lawyer, the son of a prominent physician and a recent graduate of the University of Genoa. Giuseppe Mazzini, a leader in the movement for national unification, joined the secret Carboneria society in 1827, shortly after graduating from the university.

A NTI -R ESTORATION I DEAS AND M OVEMENTS 1815–1830 Opposition to the Restoration was part of a European movement that drew inspiration from ideas of varying provenance, some traceable to the Enlightenment, others to romanticism, the intellectual reaction to the Enlightenment. The currents of thought that formed liberalism stemmed from those currents of Enlightenment thought critical of absolute monarchy. Liberals rejected royal absolutism, favored limited monarchy, written constitutions, political representation, and civil liberties. Romanticism was not strictly speaking a political movement. It expressed the disillusionment of a younger generation with the rationalism, materialism, and cult of classical forms associated with the Enlightenment, and found expression in literature and the arts. Romanticists were cultural rebels, they challenged norms, and looked inward in their search for truth and beauty. They were fascinated by history, but their historical interests were selective. The romanticist historical imagination was attracted to those periods of the past that classicists ignored or disparaged. While classicists saw beauty in the symmetry and regular lines of ancient Greek and Roman temples, romanticists were fascinated by the asymmetrical, perplexing, mysterious architecture of medieval Gothic cathedrals. The Middle Ages, popular beliefs and practices, religion, and spiritual values were the favorite subjects of romanticist artists and writers. They were interested in the particular rather than the general, in what distinguished individuals and groups, in what made them unique, rather than in what they had in common. Italian romanticists were less enamored of the medieval past than their northern European counterparts, for Italians could not fully reject the glories of the classical civilizations of ancient Rome and the Renaissance without rejecting their own past. But in the Middle Ages they discovered the principle of republican government in the free communes, and that discovery opened their eyes to what they regarded as a democratic alternative to monarchy. Romanticists did not follow a single political path and took their stand according to personal circumstances and inclinations. Reverence for tradition made conservatives of some, while the cult of individuality and self-expression turned others into rebels. It is easier to equate romanticism with political revolution in Italy than in any other country with the exception of Poland.

28 Italy

Romanticism had an Italian precursor in the Neapolitan philosopher Giambattista Vico, but the movement was born in northern Europe and arrived in Italy at a fairly late date. Its arrival was delayed by the strong influence of the Napoleonic regime, which was highly suspicious and critical of a movement that rejected authority and craved self-expression. In that period, Vittorio Alfieri displayed the rebelliousness and individualism associated with the romanticist outlook, but remained tied to the forms of literary classicism and displayed the classicist dislike of the popular. Romantic literary criticism made its debut in Italy in 1816 when the poet Giovanni Berchet published an essay urging Italian writers to pay attention to what was happening abroad, reject classicism, and seek inspiration from popular culture. The connection between romanticism and political revolt becomes clearer with Ugo Foscolo, who rebelled against both Napoleon and Austria, shared the romanticist obsession with self-expression, believed in Italian independence, and chose to go into exile rather than submit to Austrian demands. Alessandro Manzoni’s novel I promessi sposi (1827) also fits into romanticism. It did not call for rebellion, but it did castigate the arrogance of the powerful, and saw in the religious faith and simple virtues of ordinary people the way to justice. It was revolutionary in its pacifism, and its appeal to Catholic social conscience was seen as a wake-up call to the Catholic Church. No Italian writer of this period fully fits the definition of “romanticist,” but all suggest possible links between romanticism and political action. The authorities understood and feared the subversive potential of literature. They sensed the subversive message in a poem published by Giacomo Leopardi in 1820. According to an informer reporting to Austrian authorities, Leopardi’s seemingly innocuous poem Ad Angelo Mai was conceived to arouse patriotic sentiments without seeming to do so by comparing Italy’s current state of decline with its earlier greatness. But governments also understood that it took more than indignation and literary fervor to sustain a political movement. While they mostly limited themselves to monitoring the activities of the literati, they dealt more severely with those who engaged in political action. In a closed, repressive society political action took the form of political conspiracy. Secret societies flourished in Italy. Their origins go back to the 18th-century activities of freemasonry, which were more cultural and social than political. Secret political societies cropped up during the Napoleonic period. They attacked the Napoleonic system from two different directions that anticipated their lines of development after 1815. The ultraconservative secret societies of the Right were against the French and against war; they looked to the pope and called for peace. On the Left were societies that rejected Napoleonic rule as absolutist, favored constitutional monarchy, limited representation, and civil liberties. These demands, as we have seen, were the essence of political liberalism, and the secret society committed to this program was the Carboneria. Restoration government regarded all secret societies as illegal, even the antirevolutionary societies, condemning all as “sects” that promoted special interests by illicit means. Conservative societies blamed governments for retaining Napoleonic laws, failing to purge Napoleonic appointees, and promoting economic innovations that threatened the status quo. Metternich suspected

Anti-Restoration Ideas and Movements 29

that conservative secret societies were abetted by Russian agents bent on making trouble for Austria in Italy to distract its attention from the Ottoman Empire, on which the Russians had their own designs. In 1816 the Neapolitan government banned all secret societies. In 1817 the first local insurrections sponsored by the Carbonari broke out in the Papal States. These were partly the result of hardship and famine endured by Europeans in the first three years of the Restoration, but were abetted by secret societies. Far more serious were the revolutions of 1820–21, in which the Carbonari also played a leading role. These movements showed that liberal secret societies were strong enough to topple governments, which abandoned their efforts at reform and became more repressive. The revolutions showed that Italian governments could not survive without the military backing of Austria. Thousands of former revolutionaries were purged from the army and public administration, imprisoned, or driven into exile, where they continued to fight and agitate for liberal causes in Spain, France, Greece, Switzerland, England, the United States, and South America. The Italian political diaspora, a phenomenon little studied but significant for both Italy and the countries where exiles were active, began in the 1790s and intensified in the 19th century. Secret societies never fully recovered from the setbacks of 1821. Their network of cells was still large, but their effectiveness diminished. Government vigilance, internal dissension, defections, and infiltration by spies and saboteurs took a toll. When Giuseppe Mazzini joined the Carbonari in 1827 he discovered to his dismay that his “good cousins,” as the members addressed one another, did little more than go through the motions of conspiring against the system. Italian secret societies could only mount a series of minor actions when revolution broke out in France in July 1830. France toppled the absolutist Charles X and installed the moderate monarchy of Louis-Philippe, Belgium won its independence, and Poland made a desperate effort to break away from Russia. Nothing happened in Italy until February 1831, when insurrections occurred and were quickly put down in the duchy of Modena and in Bologna and other towns of the Papal States. The delay was significant, for Italian conspirators had little faith in their own capacity and banked instead on the support of revolutionary France, as they had done in 1796–97. The cautious Louis-Philippe did not intervene, and the governments of the peninsula tightened the noose around the insurgents. The uprisings of 1831 gave the Risorgimento one of its most revered martyrs in the person of Ciro Menotti, who paid with his life for his misplaced hope that the duke of Modena could be won over to the cause of revolution. It was an object lesson in what not to do if one was serious about revolution.

MOVEMENTS OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE AND UNITY 1830–1848 Historians often treat the Risorgimento as if it were a single phenomenon, a monolithic movement with clear motives and set objectives. The record suggests otherwise. The insurrections of 1831 in Italy were important not for what they accomplished in the short run, which was little enough. The events of those months are significant because of the debate that they generated, the questions they raised, and the solutions that were proposed. The decade of the 1830s laid the groundwork for what was to come. The often acrimonious debate of tactics outlined alternatives in pursuit of national independence. Most obvious was the differentiation between moderate liberals and democrats. While liberals looked to the constitutional monarchies of France and England, democrats banked on Italians to take up arms, free themselves of foreign rule, and come together as one people. The distinction between liberals and democrats that emerged in the 1830s would be an enduring aspect of the Risorgimento. Another current also made a hesitant and tentative start, looking to the papacy for national leadership. Presaged by Alessandro Manzoni, it found its most explicit advocate in the priest Vincenzo Gioberti, who in the 1830s began to look for an alternative to political revolution. His Neo-Guelf current came into its own in the 1840s in time to play a role in the revolutions of 1848. A notable consequence of 1830 was the decision by Giuseppe Mazzini to leave Genoa and go abroad. Young Italy, the society that he founded in Marseilles in 1831, rejected secret tactics and commanded its initiates to reach out to the people. It conspired in secret, but also took the revolutionary step of announcing its goals publicly and calling on all Italians to join forces. The goals were national independence and unity, the agents were to be the people, education and revolution were means to the end. Therefore, no more secret programs shared only by the initiated, no more relying on secret cells, but open proselytizing, and readiness for action. These tactics represented a conceptual breakthrough that transformed the Risorgimento from a movement deliberately limited to the select few to one that sought popular support. There was an additional feature to this democratic alternative: an acknowledgment of the seriousness of the social question. Mazzini insisted that patriots fighting for national independence must simultaneously confront social injustice. The

Movements of National Independence and Unity 31

national movement must seek to eliminate the extremes of poverty and wealth, put property within everyone’s reach, provide for mutual assistance and cooperation across class lines. Mazzini linked the movement for national independence to proposals for social change that were at the heart of the emerging debate on the nature of socialism. His proposals appealed largely to the educated youth whom he addressed in his writings, but workers also responded. They would rally to his message in greater numbers in the years to come. In that same decade, the hopes of liberals were revived from an unexpected quarter. The succession of Charles Albert of Savoy to the throne of the Kingdom of Sardinia in 1831 opened up new possibilities. A decade earlier, during the revolution of 1821 when he was serving as temporary regent, he had given in to liberal demands for a constitution. He had subsequently retracted and rehabilitated himself in the eyes of conservatives by fighting against liberals in Spain. When he came to the throne he was still trying to live down his youthful indiscretion by surrounding himself with conservative advisers, declaring loyalty to Austria and the Catholic Church, and taking a strong line against liberals. Democrats like Mazzini, of course, he regarded as beyond the pale. When Mazzini attempted to stir up trouble by inciting mutiny in the Sardinian army and navy and organizing armed raids into Savoy from Switzerland and France, Charles Albert came down hard on Young Italy and disrupted its network. Charles Albert was neither liberal nor conservative at heart; he was above all ambitious and eager to leave his mark on history. Once reassured that revolution was not a threat, he made limited political concessions, simplified the administration, and undertook a course of reform designed to stimulate trade and encourage business. He spent to improve transportation and agriculture, but about 50 percent of the budget went to building up the military, which was Charles Albert’s pride and joy. By the 1840s he was ready to break away from Austria and resume the policy of territorial expansion in northern Italy at Austria’s expense. Privately, he even expressed support for the Italian independence movement and urged all Italian patriots to have faith in him. Charles Albert, who was anything but a political liberal, played his cards well and gradually regained the confidence of liberals who had been outraged by his betrayal of their principles in 1821. Another surprising development that heartened liberals was the election of a liberal pope. Pope Pius IX was elected in 1846. The cautious reforms of the early years of his pontificate contrasted sharply with the conservatism of his predecessor, Pope Gregory XVI. The contrast itself was enough to encourage liberal expectations of change that were far in excess of what the new pope had in mind. The Neo-Guelf movement was born of these hopes. In 1843 Vincenzo Gioberti had published his influential book Del primato morale e civile degli Italiani (On the moral and civil primacy of the Italians), which augured Italian independence by peaceful means under papal leadership. What had been an unlikely prospect under the conservative Gregory XVI looked like a distinct possibility with a reformist pope. Neo-Guelfism was not an organized movement, it was a wave of enthusiasm that swept through Italy and carried along even

32 Italy

the most hesitant and cautious. Only hard-line democrats and conservatives resisted its euphoric appeal. Nearly every one else, even the peasantry that was usually suspicious of liberal schemes of reform, seemed receptive to major political changes in the peninsula under papal leadership.

T HE R EVOLUTIONS OF 1848 – 1849 Without realizing what was in store, Italian public opinion was ready for the revolutions that swept through Europe in 1848. Paris is generally regarded as the birthplace of 19th-century revolutions, but the revolutions of 1848 actually began in Italy. In December 1847 the government of Charles Albert sponsored patriotic celebrations to mark the centenary of the Genoese anti-Austrian uprising of 1747. Bonfires appeared all along the crest of the Apennines through the regions of Liguria, Tuscany, and Emilia. On January 1, 1848, the Lombards inaugurated an antismoking campaign that was a form of tax protest against the Austrian government that monopolized the sale of tobacco products. Scuffles between the police and irritated citizens suffering from withdrawal symptoms broke out in the streets of Milan and other cities. On January 3 there was an uprising in the Tuscan seaport of Livorno. On January 12 Palermo rose up against the government of King Ferdinand II and demanded autonomy for Sicily. On January 27 Ferdinand promised a constitution in the hope that the concession would defuse the unrest and restore calm. Within a month Leopold II of Tuscany, Pius IX, and Charles Albert followed suit. Revolution broke out in France on February 22–24 when Parisians overthrew the monarchy of Louis Philippe. It was then that the world took notice of what was happening and revolution spread through Europe like wildfire. On March 13 rioting in Vienna led to Metternich’s resignation. On March 15 Hungarians demanded independence from Austria and self-rule. Riots in Berlin on March 15–21 prompted the Prussian king to promise that a national assembly would decide the future of Germany. On March 18–22 fighting broke out in the streets of Milan (the Five Days of Milan), forcing the Austrian troops to abandon the city and retreat to their fortresses in the Quadrilateral. On March 23 Charles Albert’s government declared war on Austria, promising to bring Italians under Austrian rule “the help that a brother expects from a brother, a friend from a friend.” The First War of Italian Independence was fought under Piedmontese auspices, and the Italian peninsula would never be the same again. Troops and volunteers from other parts of Italy joined the fight, but hopes of military victory in a regular war against Austria were short-lived, as the Austrians recovered from their initial setbacks after a few months of fighting. On August 6, 1848, Charles Albert agreed to an armistice. Political pressures forced him to resume fighting, but the final defeat was sealed exactly one year after his declaration of war, after the Austrians defeated the Piedmontese army decisively at the Battle of Novara, Charles Albert surrendered, and abdicated in 33

34 Italy

Pope Pius IX in a Currier & Ives lithograph, 1846 (Library of Congress)

favor of his son Victor Emmanuel II. In the meantime the revolution had spread to every part of Italy, the Republic of Saint Mark had been proclaimed in Venice, and the Roman Republic in Rome, where Pius IX was forced to abandon the city. These were heady victories for democrats and republicans, who fought valiantly against overwhelming odds. Giuseppe Garibaldi led a spirited defense of the Roman Republic that, although ultimately unsuccessful, made him a national figure and prepared him for the decisive role that he would play in the future. The Italian revolutions were ultimately done in by international developments. Austria recovered and sent its armies to restore order in the peninsula. France gave only verbal encouragement to Italian revolutionaries. After Louis Napoleon was elected president of the French Republic in December 1848 the government actually turned against the revolution and dispatched an army to put down the Roman Republic. But the experience of revolution bore fruit regardless. The Kingdom of Sardinia had shown its true colors by declaring war on Austria; it retained the constitution (Statuto) that limited the powers of the king and gave effective powers to an elected legislature, it became a haven for political refugees from other parts of Italy, and it emerged in the 1850s as a constitutional monarchy governed by the Crown and an elected legislature, with a constitution that provided for orderly governance and protected civil liberties. In the eyes of liberals everywhere the state of Piedmont-Sardinia, which only a few decades before stood for the most unenlightened conservatism, now stood for orderly progress. Its new image consigned conservatives and democrats to the opposition and gave liberals authority and respectability. The liberals set out to unify Italy on their own terms. The other Italian states were discredited. The ruling dynasties of Tuscany and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies had shown that they could not survive without the external support of Austria and other conservative powers. The papacy was most affected, for Pius IX turned against the revolution and called on a coalition of Catholic powers headed by Austria and France to restore Rome to papal rule. Pius IX would never again be tempted to flirt with change. He became an intransigent defender of Catholic political and religious orthodoxy, the champion of strict Catholicism to his admirers and a religious fanatic to his detractors. He had plenty of both. After 1848 the papal curia opposed Italian unification with all the means at its disposal, including police powers and military force. The events of 1848 drew the divide between clerical supporters of the papacy and anticlerical patriots. That divide was destined to last for decades to come.

T HE D ECADE P REPARATION 1849–1859

The protagonists of the next phase of the unification movement looked back on 1848 as the turning point in their lives and in the course of the unification movement. One important lesson they learned from the defeat of revolution was that it takes more than enthusiasm and high ideals to prevail politically and militarily. Two figures exemplify how the experiences of 1848 affected the Risorgimento. Giuseppe Garibaldi distanced himself from Mazzini, tempered the republicanism of his youth, and became a loyal supporter of King Victor Emmanuel II. A man of the people by family background and personal tastes, he exemplifies the common sense approach that tries to reconcile the ideal with the practical. He had returned to Italy from South America in 1848 to fight for Pius IX under the impression that the pope supported Italian unification. The pope’s defection from the national cause turned him into a rabid anticlerical who blamed the papacy and the Catholic Church for the ills of the country and the corruption of the young. The most popular Risorgimento figure, Garibaldi put his popularity in the service of the monarchy, rallied thousands of volunteers to the cause of national unity behind the slogan “Italy and Victor Emmanuel,” and bridged the gulf between monarchists and republicans that might otherwise have led to civil war. For that he earned the affection of the people and the gratitude of the ruling dynasty. Camillo Benso, count of Cavour, is the other exemplary figure. A Piedmontese aristocrat, Cavour was an independent-minded monarchist who did not hesitate to criticize and oppose the king. He became prime minister of Piedmont-Sardinia in 1852, not because Victor Emmanuel liked him, but because he knew how to get his way in a difficult parliament split among conservatives, liberals, and democrats. He used all the tricks of politics and parliamentary procedure with great success in pursuit of his policies, which involved both more and less than he has been given credit for. It involved more because he truly believed in the merits of parliamentary government, in freedom of expression and association, in free trade, and economic progress. Dealing with Victor Emmanuel was particularly difficult for Cavour, for both were headstrong and jealous of their authority. For the most part they were able to put private feelings aside and cooperate on the most important political issues, helped in this

36 Italy

challenging task by plain common sense. On major issues Cavour behaved like a principled liberal and not like the political opportunist that his critics charged him to be. The tactics of opportunity he reserved for his dealings in parliament, where he could be treacherous to those who stood in his way. He was less than he has been given credit for because he was not, to use a familiar image, the patient tessitore (weaver) who worked tirelessly on a plan to unify Italy. Such a plan he did not have. What he had was a realistic appraisal of the Italian situation, which he thought would evolve toward some form of national unity in time, provided that Austria’s hold on Italy was loosened. Evicting Austria did not require a commitment to Italian unification in the short run. It merely required pursuing the traditional strategy of Piedmontese territorial expansion in northern Italy at Austria’s expense. It is the anti-Austrian character of Piedmontese policy under Cavour that must be kept in mind to make sense of the decade of preparation. The administrative and economic reforms that Cavour pushed through showed that Piedmont-Sardinia was a progressive state that deserved the sympathy of liberal powers like France and Great Britain, which were also rivals of Austria. The safety and financial support that the Piedmontese government provided for political refugees from the other Italian states made Piedmont the standard bearer of the struggle against Austria, which brought pressure to bear on the Piedmontese government to deny refuge and support to these political troublemakers. Cavour obliged minimally and reluctantly, just enough to give Austria no reason to make war until Piedmont was ready for it. Getting ready for the showdown meant courting the support of powers stronger than Piedmont, which could provide the military muscle that Piedmont lacked. Participation in the Crimean War as an ally of Great Britain and France was a first diplomatic step in that direction, which earned Cavour the opportunity to have the Italian question raised at the Congress of Paris that ended the war, over the strenuous objections of Austria. Cavour’s objective was to isolate Austria further and put the Italian question on the diplomatic agenda. The secret understanding of Plombières (July 1858) between Cavour and Napoleon III was a more aggressive step against Austria, that led directly to the Second War of Independence.

T HE Y EARS

D ECISION 1859–1861

Cavour practiced the politics of realpolitik, which relied on diplomacy and military power to deal with international issues. Realpolitik was incompatible with the politics of romanticism favored by Mazzinians and democrats, who envisaged liberation by popular revolution and heroic deaths on the barricades. Cavour was successful because he practiced realpolitik, and because he knew how to mix diplomacy and war in the manner most favorable to Piedmont-Sardinia. Shorn of its subtleties, his diplomacy aimed at getting a major power to fight Piedmont’s battles. He found that power in the France of Napoleon III. The Second War of Independence (April–July 1859) initiated the conclusive phase of the unification movement. Cavour had envisaged merely an enlargement of Piedmontese territory, incorporating Austrian-ruled Lombardy and Venetia, with some territorial rearrangements in the rest of the peninsula but certainly no unified Italian state as a result of the war. Events did not unfold as planned. The French did most of the fighting in the war, so much in fact and at such great cost in human lives and political risk that Napoleon III decided to end the conflict before Austria was expelled from both Lombardy and Venetia. The French decision to pull out of the war prematurely enraged Cavour, who resigned as prime minister. But while the war was in progress liberal elements orchestrated uprisings in Tuscany, Parma, Modena, and Bologna. Sometimes described as revolutions, these were really bloodless coups choreographed to make them look like expressions of the popular will. The liberal activists who seized power in these places demanded union with Piedmont-Sardinia and incited patriots in other parts of Italy to follow their example. Without Austria to police the peninsula, the unrest could not be contained. Cavour returned to power in January 1860 to manage the transition toward a larger state different from the one he and Napoleon III had envisaged. In March 1860 well-organized popular plebiscites sanctioned the annexation of Tuscany, Modena, Parma, and the papal Romagna with overwhelming majorities. Piedmont-Sardinia had to renounce Venice for the time being, but it did gain the regions of Lombardy, Emilia, and Tuscany. Unrest in southern Italy did the rest. A revolt against Bourbon rule that simmered in Sicily gave Garibaldi and his supporters the pretext they needed to

38 Italy

mount the expedition of the Thousand that sailed to Sicily in May 1860 from the town of Quarto near Genoa. Cavour did not want that expedition, but did not dare stop it for fear of alienating Garibaldi, his supporters, and patriotic opinion that was now at a boiling point. Garibaldi’s volunteers took over the island, crossed to the mainland, and marched triumphantly into Naples on September 7, 1860. Cavour regained the initiative by authorizing the invasion of papal territory by Piedmontese troops, with the excuse that the royal army was needed to maintain order in southern Italy. Garibaldi’s readiness to hand over to the Piedmontese the territory liberated by his troops opened the way to the proclamation of the united kingdom of Italy on March 17, 1861. The proclamation of national independence and unity was a milestone in the history of Italy. It brought to an end the period of occupation and dependency on foreign powers that had been Italy’s lot since 1494. Political power was now in the hands of those Italians who had fought for unification under the banner of the House of Savoy. The government of the new state conformed to what was considered progressive and People cheering as Giuseppe Garibaldi rides into prudent at the time. It had avoided what most Naples on horseback (Library of Congress) considered to be the great leap in the dark, republicanism. It was a constitutional monarchy with a parliament. The lower house of parliament (Chamber of Deputies) was elected and the upper house (Senate) was appointed by the king. The lower house controlled government spending. A restricted franchise gave the right to vote and run for political office to people of considerable wealth and education. Those restrictions enfranchised about 2.4 percent of the population (529,000 out of 21.8 millions), a low figure by later standards, but one that was not out of line with the franchise in other countries at the time, including England, whose government many Italian liberals regarded as a model. Italians had good reasons to congratulate themselves on their achievement, which had the added advantage of a relatively low cost in human lives. Deaths in all the wars of the Risorgimento up to 1860 amounted to no more than 11,200, a modest figure given the scope of the results. Yet, the new state also faced severe problems. Large regional disparities in economic development, wealth, and education posed a major challenge for the national government. Those disparities were nothing new, but the fact they now coexisted within the same political boundaries made them more glaring. The country as a whole was still overwhelmingly agricultural, but the northern regions of Lombardy and Piedmont were on the threshold of the Indus-

The Years of Decision 39

trial Revolution, while the southern regions were still struggling with the last vestiges of a feudal economy; 78 percent of all Italians were illiterate, but that national average disguised regional disparities, from around 50 percent illiteracy in the northern regions to 80–90 percent in the southern. The Southern Question was born in the 1870s when public opinion became aware of the regional disparities between north and south. It is still Italy’s preeminent social question. Church and state were declared enemies, and the enmity meant that many Catholics felt torn by conflicting religious and secular obligations. Cavour, fully aware of how dangerous the religious issue was for the Italian state, proposed a solution based on the principle, A Free Church in a Free State. Rome was still under papal control in 1861, and Cavour proposed that in return for the city of Rome, which all patriots wanted to be the capital of the Italian state, the Italian government would guarantee the full independence of the pope in the exercise of spiritual powers, exclusive papal jurisdiction over bishops and clergy, ownership of all religious buildings and furnishings, compensation for properties lost to the state, and state payment of clerical salaries. The state guaranteed freedom of religion to all. The Holy See rejected these terms and condemned the new state in no uncertain terms. On March 18, 1861, following by one day the proclamation of the Kingdom of Italy, a papal allocution asserted explicitly that the pope could not accept progress, liberalism, and modern civilization. The Syllabus of Errors reiterated these sentiments three years later, and added rationalism, socialism, free thought, religious freedom, and divorce to the list of what the pope could not accept. From the papal perspective, the Kingdom of Italy was an illegitimate robber state that despoiled the church of rightful assets and prerogatives. The internal war was on between clerical supporters of the pope and anticlerical supporters of the secular state. The unexpected rapidity of the events that brought about national unification helps explain the severity of the problems faced by the Italian state in the first decade of its history. There was not enough time for cooler heads to prevail and for effective solutions to be worked out. The administrative, legal, and military systems of seven different states had to be merged, uniform laws applied, and security assured. The victors cut through the tangle by extending the constitution and laws of Piedmont-Sardinia to the rest of the nation. Hence, the political unification of the peninsula appeared to be a Piedmontese conquest rather than the outcome of a national movement. The results were most unfortunate for parts of the South where the disintegration of the 100,000-strong Neapolitan army let loose thousands of armed men on a society that could not provide for them. The phenomenon of brigandage took on the semblance of all-out civil war in many provinces, aided and abetted by supporters of the deposed Bourbons and by the clergy. The government responded by imposing martial law on many southern provinces and conducting large-scale military operations against the brigands. These operations involved up to 120,000 troops and resulted in an untold number of civilian and military casualties. Exact figures are still not available, but estimates place the casualties somewhere between 20,000 and 74,000 for the period 1861–70, a number far greater than

40 Italy

the casualties in all the revolutions and wars of national independence even if we accept the lowest figures. What the Italian state faced in southern Italy after 1861 was a large-scale peasant insurrection caused by long-standing grievances and precipitated by the unexpected dislocations and improvised solutions of the unification movement. The manner of unification precipitated a political debate that threatened to be as divisive as the widening gap between north and south. The differences between liberals and democrats that were contained while the struggle for independence was going on erupted with full force after unification. Cavour’s premature and unexpected death in June 1861 removed from the scene the one figure with the temperament, authority, and prestige needed to manage the conflict and confront the country’s many problems. The absence of organized political parties did not make matters any easier, for while political parties were suspected of fomenting partisan hatreds, their absence meant that parliamentary life would revolve around factions and personal clienteles. What was lost in the confusion was a unitary vision of the country’s problems and the ability to implement long-range plans to solve them. The political system that prevailed after 1861 is called liberal because it was based on a written constitution that limited the power of the monarch, granted voting rights, empowered a representative legislature, and provided for the exercise of civil liberties, including freedom of association, expression, and religion. But 19th-century liberalism and democracy were two very different ideologies. Liberals believed in the rule of law, but not necessarily in giving power to the people; they valued personal liberties, and feared that they might be taken away by the masses. Italian liberals had much to worry about, for they knew that they were a minority, their enemies were legion, and that the patriotism that was their passion had shallow roots in the population. In the oftenquoted words of the patriot Massimo d’Azeglio, their task after having made the Italian nation was to make the Italian people.

T HE P OLITICS OF THE L IBERAL STATE 1861–1901 Liberals and democrats lined up on opposite sides under different names as they debated and argued over the best means to make a people and save the nation. The liberals, styling themselves the “heirs of Cavour” and known to us as the Historical Right (Destra Storica), were the parliamentary majority that governed the country from 1861 to 1876. They were mostly Lombard and Tuscan politicians, who together formed a loose union of interests known as the consorteria (clique). The consorteria was far from homogeneous. A subgroup of mostly Piedmontese deputies known as the permanente opposed the move to transfer the national capital from Turin to Florence and insisted that only Rome deserved that distinction. They lost out temporarily when the government moved the capital to Florence in 1865, but saw their dream come true in 1870. Another mostly Piedmontese faction wanted to centralize power in the hands of the national government and favored public regulation of private business, while most Lombard and Tuscan representatives wanted economic laissez-faire. The centralizers were led by the Piedmontese, Quintino Sella, the decentralizers by the Romagnole, Marco Minghetti, whose views often coincided with those of the democratic opposition. Though by no means homogeneous, the Historical Right set out to complete national unity and make the national state politically and economically viable. Rome was still governed by the pope, while Austria still possessed Venice and the mainland region of Venetia. Rome and Venice were powerful symbols in the minds of all patriots. Without Rome, Italy lacked its natural capital; Venice in Austrian hands was a reminder that the historic enemy of national independence was still a power in the peninsula, and poised to strike at Italy’s wealthiest regions. The leaders of the Historical Right did not believe in revolution. Unlike the impatient democratic opposition, which wanted Italians to fight and win their own battles in short order, the Right was willing to wait for favorable opportunities. In 1862 and 1867 Garibaldi tried and failed to take Rome with volunteer armies loyal to him rather than to the government. Mazzinians conspired without success to spark revolution in Venetia. Democratic tactics were not successful given the domestic and international realities of the moment. The Right was prepared to fight in a more conventional manner. It obtained Venice and Venetia in 1866 by allying Italy with Prussia against Austria in the Seven Weeks’ War, known to Italians as the Third War of Independence. 41

42 Italy

Taking Rome from the pope was a more complicated affair because Catholic opinion throughout the world supported the pope, and France guaranteed the independence of the little that was left of the Papal States. The Historical Right was ready to defy Catholic opinion, for they were as certain that God was on their side as was the pope that God was on his. Challenging France was much riskier, for France was a major power and Italians still depended on French diplomatic friendship, particularly against Austria. The opportunity came when the fortunes of war turned against the French in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. After the French withdrew the military garrison that they kept in Rome, the Italian army moved on the city. Pius IX surrendered it after offering token resistance at the city gate of Porta Pia to show the world that he was yielding to force. He retreated to the part of Rome that was left to him and called himself “the prisoner in the Vatican.” After the acquisition of Venice and Rome, the Historical Right showed no desire for military adventures. Financial issues preoccupied the governing majority. Maintaining a large army, paying off a large national debt, financing the construction of railroads that were urgently needed to bind together the different regions and stimulate economic development, gaining the confidence of investors needed to meet the nation’s many needs, all these were costly endeavors that placed enormous strain on the national budget. Good fiscal conservatives that they were, the leaders of the Right believed in balanced budgets. So, while on the one hand they pursued the policy of tight spending known as the politica della lesina, on the other they raised taxes. They knew that this was not the best way to win popular support, but they did not fear political unpopularity. They relied heavily on indirect taxes that had the advantage of spreading the burden throughout the population: the rich could afford to pay them and the poor, who were hit hardest proportionally, would learn to identify with the state by sharing the costs of government. The introduction in 1869 of the macinato (grist tax) levied on the milling of grains caused violent protests in many parts of the country and required calling out the army once again to restore order. The statist ideology articulated by the most prominent intellectual of the Right, the philosopher Bertrando Spaventa, emphasized that the state was an entity that stood above and transcended all special interests. As the ultimate guardian of law the state had broad obligations. Implicit in this exalted view of the nature of the state was the notion of social paternalism. Two Tuscan members of the Right, Sidney Sonnino and Leopoldo Franchetti, alerted parliament and public opinion to the needs of impoverished peasants and raised the Southern Question. The fear that industrial speculators would gain excessive influence and promote government corruption haunted some members of the Right. That fear was behind the decision to favor the nationalization of railroads. At a time when industrial manufacturing was struggling, the construction and operation of railroads was the most dynamic and lucrative sector of the national economy. Nationalizing the railroads was a means to curb railroad investors and speculators and, coincidentally, to protect the interests of landowners who were the Right’s most influential backers. The political fortunes of the Right began to slip in the national elections of 1874, when the left-

The Politics of the Liberal State 43

ist opposition won 232 seats out of 508 in the Chamber of Deputies. The Right, with a slim majority of 275, could not prevail in a vote as controversial and contested as the one on the nationalization of railroads. On March 16, 1876, Prime Minister Marco Minghetti announced triumphantly that the government had achieved a budget surplus; two days later it lost the critical parliamentary vote on the railroads and had to resign. The transfer of power to the Liberal Left (Sinistra Liberale) seemed revolutionary at the time. The new prime minister was Agostino Depretis, a former republican and a parliamentary opponent of Cavour. The Liberal Left included former Mazzinians and current followers of Giuseppe Garibaldi. There was also a geographic shift, as southern representatives occupied 194 of the Left’s 232 seats. Depretis was a northerner, but prominent leaders of the Left like Francesco Crispi and Giovanni Nicotera, the new minister of the interior, were southerners. The ideological and regional shifts seemed to promise radical change. The Left promised reduction of taxes, broadening of the suffrage, a stronger stand against clerical influence, and a more active foreign policy. They delivered on all accounts, but not to the expected degree. The Left abolished the grist tax, but did not change the system’s reliance on indirect taxes. It extended the suffrage to only 7 percent of the population. It stepped up anticlerical activities, but respected the Law of Guarantees passed by the Right to protect the independence of the papacy. In foreign policy it took the first hesitant steps in the direction of colonialism and formed the Triple Alliance with Austria-Hungary and Germany. It did not encourage irredentism and avoided giving offense to Austria-Hungary over Trento and Trieste. Dissenters distanced themselves from the moderate policies of Depretis, forming the so-called pentarchy that claimed to represent the radical spirit of the liberal Left. Depretis held the coalition together with hard work and political sleight of hand. Transformism is the label that historians apply to the system of coalition governance that he perfected. It relied on personal understandings, wheeling and dealing, and political back-scratching, and needed a deft hand at the helm to make it work. Transformism aimed at creating working parliamentary majorities out of an assemblage of deputies coming from different political directions, holding divergent views about the future of Italy, and lacking party discipline. Many historians condemn it as politically opportunistic and unprincipled. It was intended to “transform” an assorted political assemblage into a functioning parliament; it may have been unavoidable under the circumstances. Francesco Crispi denounced the practice after succeeding Depretis, who died in office in 1887, but would soon embrace its methods. Crispi, the first southern prime minister, posed as a true democrat and as the “man of destiny” who would bring glory to Italy. He vowed to move ahead with stalled reforms and delivered on his promises during his first government (1887–91) by abolishing the death penalty, revoking anti-strike laws, limiting police powers, reforming the penal system, reorganizing charities, extending the franchise, and passing public health laws and legislation to protect emigrants leaving the country to work abroad. Crispi’s intent was to seek popular support for the state with a program of orderly development at home and expansion abroad. He ran into problems

44 Italy

both at home and abroad. At home he had to confront economic crisis and a deteriorating financial situation. Socialism was making inroads among urban and rural workers, and Crispi viewed socialism as a threat to the nation. Socialists in parliament and organized labor were more interested in bread-and-butter issues that in national glory. Crispi’s desire to make Italy a colonial power complicated relations with France, which rejected Italian claims to Tunisia and opposed Italian expansion elsewhere in Africa. The two countries engaged in a tariff war that proved more harmful to Italy than to France. Southern exports of wine, olive oil, and fruit were hit particularly hard. Southern discontent and disaffection with the national government reached the boiling point in Sicily in 1893–94 with the uprising of the Fasci siciliani. Crispi was temporarily out of power when the disturbances broke out, but when he returned to power in December 1893, he imposed martial law on Sicily and provinces of central Italy where disturbances also had broken out. Antagonism with France pushed Crispi into closer relations with Germany and Austria-Hungary. Unlike his predecessors who had tried to advance Italy’s interests by balancing between its alliance partners on the one hand and England and France on the other, Crispi relied on the Triple Alliance to pursue his foreign policy goals. These were increasingly focused on East Africa, where Crispi hoped to create a large colonial empire. The attempt ended at Adowa (now Adwa) when Ethiopian forces routed an advancing Italian force with great loss of life. The ensuing uproar at home and abroad put an end to Crispi’s political career and led to the most serious crisis that the country had experienced since national unification. The crisis was more than political. A slump in agricultural production and exports, rising prices, and socialist propaganda were behind the Fatti di maggio, the tumults that broke out in May 1898 in Milan and spread to the rest of the country. Fearing a complete breakdown of law and order, conservatives called for extreme measures. The army restored order with considerable bloodshed. Freedom of the press, the prerogatives of parliament, the legitimacy of political opposition were all called into question in the five years from 1896 to 1901. The presence of new opposition parties that had no direct connection with the Risorgimento meant that new and more troublesome issues were being raised. The Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano, or PSI), the Radical Party, and the Republican Party (Partito Republicano Italiano, or PRI) were critical of the monarchy in a way that the “transformed” liberal Left could never be. Socialists rejected capitalism as a matter of principle; the other parties called for broad political and administrative reforms. Anarchism’s challenge to all forms of authority, but mostly the authority of the state, was also disquieting. It was all too much for members of the older generation brought up to believe that the country would fall apart without domestic solidarity. Conservatives invoked the principles of the founding fathers and, following the lead of Sidney Sonnino, called for a “return to the Statuto.” That was the constitution of 1848, still the law of the land but, according to the conservatives,

The Politics of the Liberal State 45

stretched way beyond the intentions of the founders who believed in monarchy, patriotism, and the rule of law. A return to the letter of the Statuto would have expanded the powers of the crown at the expense of parliament and of the army and police at the expense of civil liberties. Conservative attempts to legislate those principles into law caused a furor in parliament and the country. They were beaten back after tumultuous battles by a coalition of radicals, republicans, socialists, and liberals. That victory paved the way toward a new version of liberal government.

T HE L IBERALISM OF G IOVANNI G IOLITTI 1901–1914 Giovanni Giolitti was a new type of politician. Too young to have fought the battles of the Risorgimento, he did his apprenticeship in the administration rather than in politics. He turned to politics with a thorough understanding of how the machinery of state works. He could size up changes on the Italian scene in a dispassionate way that struck observers as cold-blooded, calculating, and indifferent to principles. Detractors on the Left called him ministro della malavita (minister of the underworld) because they accused him of winning elections with the help of criminal elements. Detractors on the Right suspected him of being a socialist at heart because he courted socialist votes in parliament and reciprocated with political favors. But Giolitti was a man of principles in his own way. He believed firmly in parliament, regarded politics as the art of the possible, did not question the legitimacy of the opposition, thought that government should do what it could to help business and the economy, and wanted the state to be neutral in conflicts between business and labor. Giolitti’s program was modern in that it accepted the rise of capital and labor as normal concomitants of economic progress, and recognized that economic and political freedom went hand in hand. He also recognized that the country’s political appetites should not exceed its economic possibilities. The so-called Giolittian era stretched from 1901 to 1914. Giolitti had served as prime minister in 1892–93 with nearly disastrous results for his political career. Government finances were in dire straits and the economy in crisis. His reputation was tainted by the scandal of the Banca Romana and by the agitation of the Fasci siciliani, both occurring on his watch. He had refused to call out the army, a decision that reflected his conviction that the government should not take sides in labor conflicts, but one that alarmed the law-and-order people. It took Giolitti eight years to overcome the stigma attached to him by his first performance as prime minister. He made his political comeback as minister of the interior in the government headed by the ailing Giuseppe Zanardelli in 1901. Giolitti was the real power broker in the government. His assumption of the prime ministry in June 1903 was an important moment because legislation that had stalled started to move forward, but the direction of government was already clear in 1901. There was to be a dialogue between liberals and

The Liberalism of Giovanni Giolitti 47

socialists, government would remain neutral in labor conflicts, reformist unions and worker cooperatives would be encouraged. It was also clear that Giolitti would use all means available to influence the electorate, that the theoretically neutral prefects would play a major role in lining up votes, and that illicit electoral practices would reach a new level, especially in the south where the press was less likely to expose abuses of power. The Giolittian era covered a critical period. In those years Italy experienced the effects of industrial expansion, mass emigration, the rise of organized labor, and the emergence of an active Catholic political movement. New radical movements appeared at both extremes of the political spectrum, nationalists on the right and revolutionary syndicalists on the left. Both were contemptuous of parliament, which was Giolitti’s favorite forum, and both condemned Giolitti’s liberalism as a corrupting influence. There was a sharp increase in the frequency and duration of labor strikes, with major ones occurring in 1904, 1906, and 1908. Labor militancy and government neutrality prompted employers to begin organizing on a national scale. The General Confederation of Labor (Confederazione Generale del Lavoro, or CGL) formed in 1906 and the employers’ Confederation of Industry (Confindustria) in 1910. Giolitti persisted in his hands-off policy as long as labor contests did not degenerate into public disorders. Southerners experienced the forceful side of Giolitti’s labor strategy more frequently than northerners, partly because repression there carried lower political costs, and partly because labor conflicts in the south often turned violent. Giolitti courted the parliamentary Left and the labor unions with social legislation that included subsidies for low-income housing, preferential awarding of government contracts to worker cooperatives, and old age and disability pensions. The nationalization of the railroads achieved in 1906 by the government of Alessandro Fortis was also part of Giolitti’s program, as was the government monopoly on life insurance achieved in 1912. The use of compulsory arbitration was intended to avert the public disorders that would have compelled Giolitti to call out the army. In the summer of 1911 Giolitti yielded to pressures to take the country to war. At stake were the North African territories of Cyrenaica and Tripolitania that were under nominal Ottoman control and ready to be seized by a colonial power. France had recently won recognition of its control over Morocco. It had disavowed any intention to seize the other two territories and promised to support Italian claims, but the French promise would lapse unless Italy acted quickly. The decision to invade was made and the naval expedition organized quickly to avoid the complications that would result from a long diplomatic debate, but inadequate planning and preparation exacted a price. After the initial seizures of the coastal towns, the campaign bogged down and opposition grew at home and abroad. So did nationalist sentiment and demands for a quick and decisive victory. Socialists condemned the war but, except for a few diehard extremists including the young firebrand Benito Mussolini, who led antiwar demonstrations and ended up in jail, they did little to stop the fighting. In reality, a patriotic frenzy swept the country. Italian emigrants abroad forgot regional

48 Italy

differences and came together in support of the war. The Treaty of Ouchy (October 1912) ended formal military operations (a guerrilla war continued for another 20 years) and concluded a peace on moderate terms. The Italian-Turkish War gave Italy the colony of Libya, islands in the Aegean Sea, and greater standing as a colonial and Mediterranean power. It also stirred up Slavic resistance against Ottoman rule in the Balkans. The two Balkan wars of 1912 and 1913 were a direct result of Italy’s war, and Balkan unrest was the direct cause of World War I. The crowning Giolittian achievement was expansion of the suffrage, which became law in June 1912. Giolitti justified it as a reward to the Italian people for the political maturity they had shown and for their patriotic support of the war. Like the war, the reform had unintended consequences. It achieved something close to universal male suffrage, expanded the electorate from 3.3 million to 8.6 million voters, or from 9.4 percent to 24 percent of the total population. It brought Italy into an era of mass participation for which Giolitti’s political organization was hardly prepared. It ended parliamentary dominance by strong figures like Giolitti, Crispi, Depretis, and Cavour. The future belonged to organized political parties. The elections of September 1913 were the first in the country’s history to involve the people at large. The results changed the way the political system worked. Liberals were still a majority, but at a disadvantage because of their loose organization, competing clienteles, and poor parliamentary discipline. The socialist opposition grew, hard-liners won control of the party, and ideological debate intensified. Catholics also benefited. Some believe Giolitti’s liberal coalition held on to a slim majority, thanks to the understanding with Catholics known as the Gentiloni Pact. The elections weakened Giolitti’s power base, hardened ideological differences, and polarized parliament. The system was more democratic, more volatile, and harder to manage. Democracy did not bring domestic peace. Antigovernment protests that became outright insurrections broke out in June 1914. Insurgents took over local administrations, proclaimed independent republics, lowered the national tricolor and hoisted the red flag over public buildings, took over transportation and communication facilities, abolished taxes, and disarmed troops. It took 100,000 troops to restore order. Dubbed Red Week, these disorders suggested that a decade of social reform had not pacified the country. Critics pointed out that liberal reforms had only whetted the appetite for more change.

T HE G REAT WAR 1915–1918 Giolitti did not have to deal with Red Week because he resigned as prime minister in March 1914. No one knew at the time that the Giolittian era had come to a close because Giolitti’s earlier resignations had always resulted in strong comebacks. This time it was different. The outbreak of the Great War, the European conflict that would later be called World War I, had immediate repercussions on the Italian political scene. When fighting broke out in August 1914 the Italian government chose to stay out of the conflict. Permanent neutrality was an option because Italian diplomats could rightly argue that nothing in the Triple Alliance treaty compelled Italy to join its allies in a war that was not defensive in character. Giolitti argued that Italy could obtain a great deal from its allies in return for a promise of neutrality, but his advice was not heeded even though public opinion and many in parliament supported him. Too much the patriot to rock the boat, Giolitti would not press his case in or outside parliament. His successor, Antonio Salandra, had a different agenda. Instead of negotiating Italian neutrality, he was willing to negotiate the terms of Italian intervention, a decision that worked in favor of supporting the Entente Powers (France, Great Britain, and Russia). Giolitti may have had a parliamentary majority behind him (it is hard to be certain because parliament was never convened to declare war), but for once he had maneuvered himself into irrelevance. The electoral reform had produced an unmanageable parliament. Nationalist sentiments had reached the boiling point. Nationalist propaganda insisted that Italy must go to war to prove that it was a great power, acquire territory, fulfill its colonial aspirations, consolidate a nation under the Italian flag, and end the disgrace of mass emigration. Liberals liked to keep domestic and foreign affairs in separate compartments. Not so nationalists, who regarded foreign and domestic policies as inextricably intertwined. From August 1914 to May 1915, while the Entente Powers (France, Great Britain, and Russia) fought against Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire, Italian diplomats negotiated the terms of Italy’s participation in the war. They negotiated with both sides, but to their Triple Alliance partners they offered only neutrality in exchange for territorial concessions by AustriaHungary, while to the Entente Powers they offered Italian intervention. The

50 Italy

Pact of London, signed in April 1915, set the terms of Italy’s intervention on the side of the Entente. But while the negotiations were going on in secret, a very public debate developed in the country over the merits of intervention versus neutrality. That debate had lasting political repercussions. The Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano, or PSI), organized labor, the Catholic Church, the Catholic contingent in parliament, and most Giolittian liberals favored neutrality. Except on the nationalist Right, where interventionist sentiments prevailed, interventionists were in the minority among the country’s organized forces. On the Left, Benito Mussolini was expelled from the Socialist Party because of his interventionist views and carried with him a minority of leftwing interventionists. What seemed at the time little more than a party squabble would have major repercussions after the war. Nationalist fervor was rampant among the educated. Students, middle-class professionals, writers, and other intellectuals were ready for war. War would be a great adventure, they could emulate the heroic deeds of their fathers and grandfathers who had unified the country, they would make good on claims that Italy was a great power. It is hard to gauge popular sentiment beyond these minorities because public opinion polls did not exist and the press reflected the views of organized groups. Peasants, who constituted a majority, were influenced by the neutralist sentiments of the church, and urban workers by the Socialist Party and labor unions, which also favored neutrality. The signing of the secret Pact of London, with its stipulation that Italy must go to war within a month, placed the government in the difficult position of choosing a side secretly, with the country divided between neutralists and interventionists, possibly against the wishes of the majority. The constitution allowed the king to declare war without consulting parliament, but in the absence of a parliamentary mandate it was all the more important to have a show of overwhelming popular support. Thus, the four weeks that elapsed between the signing of the Pact of London and the declaration of war saw well-orchestrated events and street demonstrations. The press gave intensive coverage to the public speeches by Gabriele d’Annunzio to delirious urban crowds. Italy declared war on Austria-Hungary on May 24, 1915. The fact that it did not declare war on Germany until August 28, 1916, points to Italy’s limited objectives. The war was being fought to obtain specific territories from the historic enemy of Italian independence. Salandra articulated this narrow vision of the war by invoking the “sacred egoism” of national interest. It was not an uncommon view at the time among government leaders, but it was one that posed special problems for Italy, as its leaders clung tenaciously to this view long after others decided that the war was being fought for grand ideals, including abolishing war itself, outlawing secret diplomacy, providing self-determination for national minorities, and making the world safe for democracy. The decision to go to war was facilitated initially by the opinion of most military experts that the war was bound to be violent but of brief duration. Instead, the opposing armies had bogged down in a war of attrition with no end in sight. The Entente Powers hoped that Italian intervention would tip the scales against Germany and Austria-Hungary, and for that reason had been rather generous with

The Great War 51

promises of territorial and colonial gains. Italian military leaders prepared for war as best as they could, but there were major deficiencies in armaments and supplies, due in part to the recent war in North Africa, that Italian industry could not easily make up. Heavy artillery and machine guns were in short supply, there were not enough trained officers, and the Austrian border was poorly defended because, by the terms of the Triple Alliance, Austria should have been an ally rather than the enemy. Had the Austrians been better prepared they conceivably could have scored the rapid victory sought by the Italians. But neither side prevailed. Both had to contend with the forbidding nature of the mountainous terrain, deficiencies in armaments, and outmoded military thinking. The front was 400 miles long, but most of the fighting occurred along a 60-mile stretch in the northeastern sector along the Isonzo River from the town of Tolmino in the Alps to the Adriatic Sea. The 11 “battles of the Isonzo” fought between May 1915 and August 1917 won the Italians some terrain, but were enormously costly in lives and materiel. The creation of the Arditi shock troops was an effort to break the stalemate and restore movement to what had become a bloody war of attrition. The 12th battle was almost decisive, but not as the Italians had hoped. It resulted in the nearly disastrous Austro-German breakthrough at Caporetto that drove the Italians back to the Piave River and cost them thousands of casualties and prisoners. It took the Italians nearly a year to recover. Much changed in that last year. A government of national unity, led by Vittorio Emanuele Orlando, took steps to restore civilian morale and improve relations with the army. The new army commander, General Armando Diaz, was much better than his competent but insensitive and rigid predecessor, General Luigi Cadorna, at dealing with soldiers and civilian leaders. Troop morale improved, civilians rallied behind the war effort, and the public perceived the war as one of national defense rather than conquest. The final offensive was well timed. In October 1918 the army resumed the offensive against an exhausted enemy ready to collapse, and the Austrians signed an armistice at Villa Giusti on November 4. The Italians were the only ones to end the war victorious on enemy territory. World War I ended seven days later when the Germans signed the armistice of Compiègne. The Italian army, almost defeated a year earlier, had made a remarkable recovery and beaten both enemies and allies in the drive to secure peace. A war fought so hard and for so long was bound to have major repercussions on the home front. A striking characteristic of the Italian political scene was that the end of fighting saw a resumption of the old polemics between neutralists and interventionists. Alone among European socialist parties, the Italian Socialist Party, in favor of Italian neutrality before the war, had adopted during the war a policy of neither supporting nor sabotaging the war effort (né aderire né sabotare). That ambiguous stand left them vulnerable to accusations of defeatism, of having undermined troop morale with their antiwar propaganda, of having brought on the defeat at Caporetto, and of working for communist revolution in Italy, as the Bolsheviks were doing in Russia. War and the Russian Revolution split the Italian left. Republicans, radicals, and social democrats rallied behind the government. Some socialists, impressed by the victory of commu-

52 Italy

nism in Russia, did want a communist revolution, while others thought that Italian workers should press for a greater share of the fruits of victory, including better wages and benefits, and shorter working hours. In reality it was not always possible to distinguish between reformists and revolutionaries, for any form of labor militancy could easily be seen as part of a revolutionary plan. The urban unrest and “bread riots” of the summer of 1917 seemed a prelude to revolution similar to what was happening in Russia. The war also intensified the traditional antagonism between city and countryside, for the mostly peasant infantry had carried the burden of fighting, while large numbers of industrial workers had remained at home with military deferments to work on jobs deemed critical to the war effort. Peasant families, on the other hand, suffered from high casualties, lost income, requisitions of produce and livestock, and decreased consumption. The government promised land and jobs to boost troop morale. Veterans expected to cash in on those promises at war’s end.

THE POSTWAR CRISIS AND THE R ISE OF FASCISM 1918–1922 Italy was represented at the Paris Peace Conference by Prime Minister Vittorio Emanuele Orlando and Foreign Minister Sidney Sonnino. Their insistence on full implementation of the territorial provisions of the Pact of London, plus additional compensations for the prolonged nature of the war and the changed situation in the Balkans due to the unanticipated demise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, clashed with the expectations of Italy’s wartime allies. The Caporetto debacle, although hardly worse than the reverses suffered by the others, gave the allies a pretext to disparage Italy’s contribution to the joint war effort and oppose its demands. Their propaganda in turn enflamed Italian nationalists, who accused the government of being too accomodating at the peace table and called the result a “mutilated victory.” Their anger focused on President Woodrow Wilson, whom they held chiefly responsible for opposing Italy’s demands. Wilson was a formidable opponent because he personified the idealism of the war effort and was immensely popular in Europe. The enthusiastic receptions he received during a trip to Italy in January 1919 attested to his popularity among Italians. He appealed directly to the Italian people over the heads of their representatives in Paris to mitigate their demands and respect the principle of self-determination for the Slavic populations of the new state of Yugoslavia. That meant that Italians should gave up their claim to the city of Fiume, whose transfer to Italy had not been included in the Pact of London. As a major seaport it was more important for the Yugoslavs than for the Italians, who acquired the even more important port city of Trieste. The self-determination argument was perhaps less compelling because the city was Italian-speaking, but the majority in the suburbs and countryside was Croatian. The Italian delegation abandoned the peace conference in protest when it could not get its way, then returned to participate in the final sessions, but Orlando’s prestige was badly shaken at home and he resigned as prime minister in June 1919. Matters took an unexpected turn in September when Fiume was seized and occupied by a band of Italian paramilitary “legionnaires” led by Gabriele d’Annunzio. In Fiume d’Annunzio assumed the title “comandante” and created many of the patriotic rituals, including military parades, salutes, war cries, the cult of youth, and speeches from the balcony that would become part of fas53

54 Italy

cism. The fate of Fiume became a highly emotional issue that complicated postwar politics. The government refused to accept the city from the legionnaires and evicted them by force, after the city had proclaimed its independence and even declared war against Italy. Italy eventually got the city, minus the suburbs and countryside, with international approval. But that conclusion was far off in the future. The fact that the legionnaires were mostly disgruntled army officers, and that more flocked to join them after the seizure of the city, suggested deteriorating military discipline, that the government had a tenuous hold on the armed forces, that nationalist passions could put to a severe test the loyalty and discipline of the armed forces, and that the country might face the danger of civil war. Rapidly escalating social conflicts also seemed to portend civil war. The years 1919–20 are remembered as the biennio rosso (Red Years). Labor strikes reached unprecedented levels of frequency and intensity. They culminated in the occupation of the factories by workers in September 1920, after which the agitation abated. But the forcible eviction of management from the factories, and the government refusal to intervene, scared employers, who began to think in terms of self-defense and to look for new political allies. A new electoral law of August 1919 introduced the system of proportional representation. The elections held in November 1919 on the basis of that law produced a parliament that reflected accurately the political divisions of the country. An assortment of political formations that could be broadly defined as centrist, including liberals, democrats, radicals, republicans, and social democrats, accounted for 252 seats out of a total of 508 seats in the Chamber of Deputies. Socialists won 156 seats, and the Catholic Popular Party (Partito Popolare Italiano, or PPI) 100 seats. A parliament so configured could not produce stable governments because the liberal center was not homogeneous and the two major parties would cooperate neither with liberals nor with one another. Coalition governments headed by Francesco Saverio Nitti (1919–20), Giovanni Giolitti (1920–21), and the lesser figures of Ivanoe Bonomi (1921–22) and Luigi Facta (1922) governed precariously in the face of mounting economic discontent and popular unrest. The demobilization of millions of veterans, unemployment, inflation, food and fuel shortages, food rationing, strikes, and outbreaks of politically motivated street demonstrations were salient features of the Italian scene in 1919–20. To make matters worse, in 1918–19 Italy, like other countries, suffered from a lethal influenza (la spagnola) that deepened people’s fears and sense of insecurity. Instead of bringing the promised peace and prosperity, the end of the war ushered in a period of crisis that played into the hands of political extremists and fringe groups. Political success for these initially small groups depended on inventive leadership, ability to transform the issues of the moment into a set of easy propositions, and build a political base that cut across traditional social divides. Fascism rose against this grim background of fear, resentments, and desperate grasping for new ideas to confront a crisis that was the direct result of war. Benito Mussolini founded the fasci di combattimento in Milan, Italy’s leading industrial city, on March 23, 1919. He pitched his message specifically at war

The Postwar Crisis and the Rise of Fascism 55

veterans, whom he called the trincerocrazia (aristocracy of the trenches) and welcomed as a new and decisive political force. A former socialist, interventionist, and war veteran, he had the requisite qualifications to address the enormous mass of veterans that he predicted would shake the very foundations of society. He was also a talented political journalist. His personal newspaper, Il Popolo d’Italia, was an effective vehicle for the dissemination of his views and those of his movement. And the “fascism of the first hour,” the first and most radical version of fascism, did promise radical change. It rejected monarchy and called for a republic; it demanded abolition of the Senate because it was appointed rather than elected; it promised universal suffrage for men and women, a system of political representation that took into account the economic role and professional qualifications of individuals and groups, and a voice for workers in the process of production. The program condemned socialism, not because it was socialist but because it was anti-national. Instead of class war and the dictatorship of the proletariat, fascism promised class cooperation. It condemned the bourgeoisie, but not capitalism. The bourgeoisie was a state of mind, capitalism was a system of production. The enemy was not capitalism but the state, which shackled the process of production with high taxes and excessive regulation. Not wealth redistribution, but “productivism” would solve the social problems of the nation. Fascism promised its own revolution, distinct from that of the socialists. The Fascist revolution began in April with the sacking and burning of the Milan premises of Avanti!, the Socialist Party newspaper. It was the first of many “punitive expeditions” carried out against political opponents by paramilitary “squads” answering to Mussolini and other leaders of the movement. The squadristi were for the most part war veterans, some from the elite Arditi troops, usually former officers who found it difficult to reenter civilian life and could not abandon the habit of command that they had acquired during the war. Fascism was initially an urban movement of the North, but it soon spread into the countryside and to other parts of the country. The growth was rapid after the occupations of the factories by workers in September 1920. The occupations, and the government’s failure to evict the occupiers, frightened employers and landowners. They were also emboldened by the failure of the occupations into thinking that they could now launch a successful counteroffensive against the unions and the socialists with their own resources and the help of squadristi. Thus began in the course of 1921 the conversion of fascism from a movement that promised radical change to one that insisted on the restoration of law and order as a precondition for change. While industrial employers tried to maintain a certain distance from fascism, landowners relied increasingly on the Fascist action squads to attack and destroy union headquarters, worker cooperatives, and mutual aid societies. Fascists also directed their organized attacks against socialist newspapers and party headquarters. As they became better organized and bolder, they removed local elected officials and took over local administrations. The young Italo Balbo was particularly successful in his native province of Ferrara and throughout the Po Valley, where the network of worker organizations was most developed. Balbo deluded himself into thinking that he was attacking not socialism but “those

56 Italy

other Austrians,” in other words enemies of the nation, as he called the socialists who organized workers and incited them to act against employers and landowners. The squadristi did not apologize for using violence against legitimate organizations and elected officials. The cult of the minority as the repository of the national interest was an integral part of Fascist ideology. Mussolini had said in his founding speech that majorities are static, and minorities are dynamic, and he explicitly endorsed “the dictatorship of will and intelligence” over the inert masses. There was always that fundamental contradiction at the core of Fascist ideology, that on the one hand it held up the Italian people as a model of civilization, while on the other it rejected “the masses” as the deadweight of history. The contradiction did not matter much in practice, for Fascists arrogated to themselves the right to speak for the people and coerce the masses, but it did force the Fascists into performing a delicate balancing act. They had to convince Italians that they wanted to have and do what the Fascists wanted them to have and do. That was a feat seemingly beyond the power of the Fascist movement in its early days. The lack of discipline and the unpredictability of local Fascist bosses, or ras, as these independent-minded potentates were called, worried Mussolini. Hence his attempts to rein in his undisciplined followers, develop a uniform ideology, and transform the movement into a regular political party. In the elections of May 1921 he and 34 other Fascists were elected to parliament in the list of government candidates sponsored by Giolitti. The old political wizard hoped that being represented in parliament would help “transform” the Fascists into law-and-order people. In August 1921 Mussolini engineered the Pact of Pacification between Fascists and Socialists, over the strenuous objections of the most belligerent ras. At Mussolini’s insistence, the Fascist movement became the Partito Nazionale Fascista (PNF) in November 1921. Controlling the squads proved more difficult. It occurred more than a year later in December 1922, after the Fascists had come to power, when the squads were organized into a centrally run party militia. Moderate opinion looked favorably on these developments. They suggested that fascism might yet be channeled into the ways of legality. Containing fascism was too much of a challenge for postwar governments. Resting on shaky parliamentary majorities and coalitions, these governments were at the mercy of political parties that were locked in ideological conflicts and incapable of forming a common front. Government policy wavered, sometimes taking a hard line on issues of law and order, sometimes closing an eye to what many liberals regarded as acts of justified violence against the subversives of the left. Nitti instituted the Royal Guard (Guardia Regia), a military police force trained to deal with street disorders. Giolitti hoped to engage the Fascists in the give-and-take of parliamentary politics, but he also ordered the police to shoot them down if they misbehaved seriously in the streets. That was an act of political courage, as was the decision to abolish budget-breaking government subsidies to keep the price of bread artificially low. Giolitti resigned when the elections of May 1921 failed to give him the majority he needed to govern. Mussolini had intimated in the campaign preceding the election that

The Postwar Crisis and the Rise of Fascism 57

the Fascists intended to seize power with a “march on Rome” that would give them control of the capital and the national government. The scenario proved more complicated, as Mussolini adopted a twofold strategy of encouraging and preparing his followers to make the big move on the capital, while maneuvering politically behind the scenes to eliminate or minimize opposition to the move. It was a time-consuming but ultimately successful tactic. The squads began to gather and move on Rome in the last days of October 1922. Mussolini waited out the events in Milan, keeping open his options, which included beating a hasty retreat into nearby Switzerland if matters turned ugly for the Fascists, until the refusal of King Victor Emmanuel III to sign the martial law decree that would have ordered the army to put down the Fascist squads told him that he had nothing to fear from the king and the army. He then demanded and received the king’s invitation to form his own government. On October 31, 1922, Italy had a new prime minister in the person of Benito Mussolini. He would remain in that post, with significant changes of title, until July 25, 1943.

T HE S EIZURE

P OWER

1922–1925 When Mussolini was appointed prime minister the Fascists were a parliamentary minority that needed the help of other parties and groups to govern constitutionally. Not that there was any doubt that they would rule one way or another. Mussolini made that quite clear when he said that “Our program is simple: We want to rule Italy,” and when he told the Chamber of Deputies in his maiden speech as premier that had he chosen to do so he could have transformed that “gray chamber” into a bivouac for his troops. But he was saved from having to govern dictatorially right away by the willingness of most liberal and Catholic deputies to cooperate with the new government in the hope that the responsibilities of power would dampen the Fascists’ enthusiasm for radical change. Mussolini accepted the help of those willing to cooperate with his government and even went so far as to make overtures to moderate socialists, perhaps to further divide them and to introduce into his government a new element that would make it look more representative and pro-labor. His overtures to the socialists did not pan out, but that still left his government with a majority that was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Parliament voted his government extraordinary powers for a period of one year in budgetary and fiscal matters. His first finance minister was Alberto De Stefani, an economic liberal and free trader who set about the difficult task of balancing the budget, cutting back on government regulations, reducing the size of the bureaucracy, improving communications and transportation, and helping an economic recovery that was already underway. The search for allies across the political spectrum and the pursuit of administrative reforms suggest perhaps a desire to de-escalate ideological conflict and create an atmosphere of relative calm in which urgently needed technical reforms could be discussed and implemented. Domestic concerns were certainly uppermost in Mussolini’s mind in his first three years of government. In that time the conduct of foreign policy was left mostly in the hands of career diplomats in the ministry of foreign affairs, managed by Salvatore Contarini, who held the post of secretary-general of that ministry from 1920 to 1925—mostly but not entirely in the hands of professional diplomats, for in 1923 Mussolini provoked a show of force with Greece and sent a naval force to occupy the Greek island of Corfu. He backed off under pressure from the British govern58

The Seizure of Power 59

ment, but won a significant victory the following year when he pressured Yugoslavia into giving up its claims to Fiume and annexed that long-disputed town. The seizure of Corfu remained an isolated episode for the time being and the annexation of Fiume could hardly be seen as anything but an overdue settlement. The overall record of government in these early years suggested that the liberals might have been right in thinking that the responsibilities of government would tame Mussolini and his Fascist followers. But such hopes would have been misplaced because there were other and less reassuring aspects of Fascist government from the very start. Mussolini was never content with mere administrative reforms. He told the Fascist Grand Council, a new body that he created in December 1922 and that was destined to take on important functions of government, that fascism had not carried out the march on Rome to engage in ordinary administration. He also wanted to make parliament more cohesive and compliant. Parliament appointed a commission headed by the Fascist deputy Giacomo Acerbo to study electoral reform. It came up with a proposal that was approved by a majority in June 1923. Most liberals, including Giovanni Giolitti, supported the reform, as did many Catholic representatives. Only the socialists and communists voted against it. The new electoral law enabled the Fascists to win control of parliament in the national elections of April 1924, but their victory was marred by charges that they had terrorized the opposition and manipulated the vote. On May 30, 1924, the socialist leader Giacomo Matteotti presented parliament with a welldocumented exposé of electoral irregularities and demanded the nullification of the elections. On June 10 he was abducted while on his way to parliament, spirited away in a car, severely beaten, and killed by a group of Fascist enforcers. Matteotti’s disappearance and the discovery of his remains in August precipitated a crisis that nearly brought down Mussolini’s government. About 150 opposition deputies abandoned parliament in protest to meet as a counter-parliament in the so-called Aventine Secession. King Victor Emmanuel III did not answer their appeal to dismiss Mussolini. The degree of Mussolini’s personal responsibility in the crime has never been ascertained. He may have wanted Matteotti punished physically but not killed, he may not have known when or how the action would take place, but orders to proceed against Matteotti probably originated from within his government. When Matteotti’s death was ascertained all government figures suspected of collusion in the crime and the attempted coverup were dismissed from their posts, including Minister of the Interior Emilio De Bono. Mussolini wanted to reassure public opinion, but tensions rose throughout the summer and fall of 1924. In December a group of hard-line Fascists confronted Mussolini and demanded decisive action. Mussolini responded on January 3, 1925, with a speech in parliament that ended all doubts about where he stood. He assumed the political but not criminal responsibility for what had happened, dared his opponents to bring charges against him, and promised a quick restoration of order and calm in the country. The Aventine secessionists were not allowed to return to parliament, the opposition was muzzled, dissident groups driven underground, and press censorship became systematic.

60 Italy

The Matteotti crisis ushered in a new phase of Fascist rule that saw an expansion of government that would have been hard to predict in the earlier “liberal” phase. Opponents of the regime coined the term “totalitarian” to condemn fascism’s pursuit of absolute power. Mussolini adopted the term triumphantly, boasting that fascism intended to go beyond the customary political functions of government to penetrate and organize all aspects of social life, become a daily presence in the lives of ordinary people, and shape the attitudes and behavior of individuals. The “Fascist regime” was the machinery devised in pursuit of that goal, starting in 1925. Parliament was reduced to a rubberstamping body and its makeup and functions were radically transformed by corporative reforms, its membership handpicked by the Fascist Party and various other official organs. Only the Fascist Party operated legally, all the other parties having been disbanded or driven underground. Mussolini was now the Duce, his title no longer that of prime minister but of head of government responsible to the king. Mussolini was outwardly deferential toward the king, but inwardly resented the “dyarchy” or formal sharing of power—a formal sharing only, because the king reigned but did not rule. Worker strikes and employer lockouts were banned and only government-approved labor unions and employer associations were authorized to engage in collective bargaining. Government arbitrators stood ready to settle unresolved labor disputes. The Opera Nazionale Balilla (later renamed Gioventù Italiana del Littorio) enrolled boys and girls ages six to 15. The National Organization for the Protection of Mothers and Infants, founded in December 1925, promoted the regime’s policy of population growth and racial health. Other public health initiatives included campaigns to contain and eradicate rampant diseases like malaria and tuberculosis. Fascism’s politica della razza (racial policy) began as a drive to promote not racial purity but the physical and mental health of Italians, who were now urged to live actively, participate in sports, enjoy the outdoors, eat and drink soberly. The Opera Nazionale Dopolavoro discounted meals, provided centers for cultural and recreational activities, sponsored theatrical performances, and organized group excursions. It was the regime’s most popular innovation, perhaps because it avoided overt political propaganda.

T HE FASCIST R EGIME IN ACTION 1925–1935 Putting in place this machinery of government and social control was a lengthy and complicated process that continued into the 1930s. “Deals” among different and rival interest groups were an integral part of the process. Negotiations with the Catholic Church settled the long-standing Roman Question. The Lateran Pacts and Concordat of 1929 established formal relations between the Holy See and the Italian government, guaranteed the church full independence in the exercise of spiritual powers, established Catholicism as the religion of the state, expanded religious instruction in the schools, acknowledged the jurisdiction of the church on questions of marriage, and compensated the church for expropriated properties and financial losses. The potential for friction in some sensitive matters was never eliminated. The organization of youth was a case in point, the adoption of racial policies by the regime in the late 1930s was another. But generally, after 1929 church and state got along reasonably well, to the relief and approval of millions of Italians who, in March 1929, gave the regime a resounding vote of confidence in the first national referendum held after the march on Rome. Just as important was the accommodation with the army, to achieve which the regime refrained from creating an independent militia loyal to the Duce and the party. The militia that evolved after 1925 was never a serious rival to the regular army. It was subject to army rule and discipline and lost much of its military effectiveness through deliberate neglect. Army officers still pledged loyalty to the king. The army, the church, and the Crown backed the regime. Other important compromises occurred in the areas of economic and social policy. Workers lost freedom of association, had to accept leaders and spokesmen that they did not choose, and suffered wage cuts in times of economic crisis. In return they obtained considerable job security and benefits in the form of family allowances, paid vacations, health and old age insurance. Social welfare came to Italy with fascism. Employers benefited in many ways. They no longer had to contend with rebellious unions and worker demands that threatened managerial prerogatives. The government favored heavy industry and rescued industrial firms on the verge of bankruptcy. In return they had to accept an unprecedented degree of regulation by cartels, ministries, and various other

62 Italy

public agencies, including the powerful Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (Istituto per la Recostruzione Industriale, or IRI). The protectionist policies of the late 1920s and 1930s benefited domestic industries that were deemed strategically valuable, particularly those related to the production of armaments. The cartelization of industries in the 1930s protected even the least efficient producers by guaranteeing existing firms a share of the national market and quotas of scarce raw materials. Landowners benefited from the campaign to expand agricultural production that started in 1925. The centerpiece of that campaign was the “battle for wheat” that the regime touted as an all-out effort to modernize agriculture. By 1938 Italian farmers produced enough wheat to meet the domestic need, at great cost to the taxpayers who subsidized the program and to the detriment of livestock production and meat consumption. The regime spent the huge sum of nearly 16 billion lire on land reclamation from 1922 to 1939. Land reclamation, another showpiece project, was expected to contribute to the sbracciantizzazione (“deproletarization”) of the agricultural labor force by turning landless workers into small peasant proprietors and break their traditional ties to the political parties of the left in parts of north and central Italy. In the south, the regime’s primary motivation was to win support for the regime in a part of the country that, with few exceptions, was indifferent to fascism. The battle for wheat, the use of machinery and artificial fertilizers, training of agrarian experts, land reclamation, and incentives to keep families on the land were part of a concerted effort to win the support of the country’s rural population. In reality, most of the rural population derived little benefit from the regime’s economic and social programs. Few peasants belonged to any of the regime’s formal organizations, with the possible exception of the Dopolavoro. The Massaie Rurali, an organization for peasant housewives, was established only in 1935 and was poorly funded. For most rural workers, finding employment outside agriculture was difficult because of laws that restricted internal migration to those who already had an offer of work. Anti-migration laws were an important part of the program of “ruralization” that was designed to keep people on the land and regulate the movement of people to the industrial cities. “Ruralization” offered few material advantages to ordinary peasants, but it did offer some moral compensation. The peasant family, life on the soil, and the simple pastimes of country life were praised in art and song as social models and ideals. Mussolini was the central figure of the regime because of his uncommon ability to win the trust of powerful interests and manipulate the many contending factions and pressure groups that regarded him as the indispensable mediator. His ability to be many things to many people was a powerful asset. Although it is usually obscured by his carefully cultivated public image as a domineering figure, the key to his acceptance and longevity in power was the ability to strike compromises, make decisions that left many doors open, threaten only declared enemies, and keep alive the hopes of collaborators. Such temporizing did not sit well with everyone, and throughout the 1920s there was a steady exodus of discontents from the ranks, including Fascist anticlericals who objected to the cozy relations with the church, labor activists who

The Fascist Regime in Action 63

wanted more for workers, laissez-faire liberals opposed to government regulation, assorted hard-liners impatient with the slow pace of change, and insiders revolted by the evidence of collusion and corruption. The Fascist Party, home to many discontents, was purged of dissidents and entrusted to the care of Achille Starace, a Fascist who could be relied on to follow Mussolini’s directives blindly. Mussolini disliked independent-minded collaborators and surrounded himself with obedient automatons like Starace or industrious civil servants like police chief Arturo Bocchini. Mussolini the zealous bureaucrat is a little-known figure worth studying. The Fascist Party did not have much influence on state policy in the 1930s but was very active in public life, where it performed highly visible ritual functions. The organization of rallies, parades, community projects, and propaganda campaigns was its specialization. The party’s primary task was to organize popular “consensus” for the regime, a troublesome and controversial issue if ever there was one. The evidence suggests that by the mid 1930s there was indeed broad popular support for the regime, which could boast of some significant achievements in social policy and the pacification of the country. The generation born during and right after the war was now coming of age and knew of no other system. The regime appealed to the young and made much of them as the hope of the future. Those among their elders who were not happy with the status quo grumbled cautiously. Above and beyond the arrangements and deals discussed earlier that tied specific interest groups to the regime, the overarching themes of nationalist propaganda had broad appeal. Those with the most formal education were influenced the most, for they were the ones most exposed and receptive to the regime’s official propaganda. Support for the regime was therefore most noticeable among the educated middle classes, which also benefited from the expansion of career opportunities in government and the public sector of the economy. Students in secondary schools and universities, graduates, teachers, civil servants, and professionals, both men and women, were drawn to the regime. The less educated of both sexes, the peasantry of north and south, were the least affected by the various patriotic myths popularized by the regime, including the cult of ancient Rome (romanità), of the Duce as the father of his people, and of Italy as the cradle of civilization. What all of this bought the regime was the active support of many among the educated, and passive support by the rest of the population.

F OREIGN P OLICY AND THE ROAD TO WAR 1935–1940 By 1935 most opponents of the regime had been driven out of the country, the few who were in the underground at home posed no threat, the economy had been spared the worst ravages of the Great Depression, and corporative reforms were in place. Foreign governments accepted the regime, seeing it as a bulwark against communism and as a necessary corrective to the individualism and anarchic tendencies of the Italian people. But the order that prevailed at home and the acceptance of the regime abroad were also signs that fascism had reached an impasse. Mussolini was fully aware that what had been achieved fell far short of what had been promised. Still unrealized was the promise of national greatness and empire. The 1920s had not been propitious for dramatic gestures and shows of force. During that decade Italian diplomacy had generally seconded multilateral peaceful initiatives like the Treaties of Locarno (1925) that confirmed the inviolability of existing political boundaries, signed friendship treaties with a number of countries, including Ethiopia and Albania, which would soon bear the brunt of Italian expansionist ambitions, and shown due regard for the authority of the League of Nations and the system of collective security. There were exceptions, like the seizure of Corfu in 1923 and repeated efforts in the 1920s to foment discord in the neighboring state of Yugoslavia, but not enough to suggest that Fascist diplomacy was substantially different from that of other powers. Matters were somewhat different at home, where military parades, a cult of uniforms, nationalist indoctrination, the paramilitary organization of youth, and the spreading cult of romanità nurtured dreams of empire. Mussolini’s attention shifted from domestic to foreign affairs after 1929 when he felt that the regime was securely established at home. The rise of Hitler and national socialism in Germany opened new prospects for playing off Germany against France and Great Britain to Italy’s advantage. Mussolini followed German developments with the closest attention and ambivalent feelings. On the one hand, he recognized the similarities between fascism and national socialism and was flattered by Hitler’s attention and praise. Hitler always acknowledged Mussolini as his ideological predecessor and hailed him as a historical figure of the first rank. Mussolini valued the admiration for the political ascendancy it gave him, but also worried about national socialist claims to Austria and the southern Tyrol, and 64

Foreign Policy and the Road to War 65

was aware that the ideologies of fascism and national socialism differed in important ways. On the subject of the Tyrol Hitler was cautious, but his closest collaborators made no mystery of their intention to incorporate the German-speaking populations of the Trentino–Alto Adige into the Third Reich. There were ideological differences on the issue of race. Biological racism was the central tenet of national socialism; it played no role in Fascist ideology. Italian fascism had made peace with the Catholic Church, while national socialism viewed the church as a rival and enemy. Mussolini’s interest in foreign policy grew as Hitler came closer to seizing power. In July 1932 the Duce added the post of foreign minister to his other duties. Libya was finally pacified after a 20-year struggle against native resistance. In December 1932 Mussolini commissioned General Emilio De Bono to prepare plans for war in Ethiopia. The choice of De Bono was significant, for De Bono was the army general most closely associated with fascism, and Mussolini wanted a military triumph with a clear Fascist imprint. Hitler’s appointment as German chancellor in January 1933 focused Mussolini’s attention on the issue of European borders. The Four Power Pact, also known as the Patto Mussolini, called on France, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy to collaborate toward peaceful revisions of the borders set by the Versailles Treaty. A series of amendments rendered it meaningless, but the fact the Mussolini attached great importance to it suggests that he was positioning himself to act as mediator between Nazi Germany and the two western democracies. That was Italy’s customary role in European diplomacy and did not necessarily imply aggressive designs, but Mussolini sought leverage to pursue a dynamic foreign policy. Ethiopia was an objective, but he was also mindful of Italy’s continental role and European interests, which now seemed threatened by Germany. He was committed to Austrian independence because the unification of Austria and Germany (Anschluss) demanded by the Nazis would have put Germany on Italy’s borders and threatened Italy’s control of the southern Tyrol. Italy’s influence in Hungary and the rest of central Europe was also threatened by Germany’s rising power. Hitler and Mussolini met for the first time in Venice in June 1934. The meeting was not the disaster that reports made it out to be, but it did not resolve all differences. Hitler assured Mussolini that Germany had no designs on the Italian Tyrol, but the question of Austrian independence was unresolved. The two countries almost came to blows in July when Austrian Nazis attempted unsuccessfully to overthrow the Austrian government and killed Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss, Mussolini’s protégé, while the Mussolinis were playing host to Dollfuss’s family. The dispatch of four Italian army divisions to the border at the Brenner Pass was a dramatic gesture that caught the attention of the world. The show of force reinforced Mussolini’s image as a decisive leader who was capable of holding Hitler in check. In April 1935 the representatives of France, Great Britain, and Italy met at the Stresa Conference to discuss the formation of a common front against Germany. Mussolini pressed hard for a strong condemnation of Germany, but came away with the impression that France and Great Britain were not serious about containing Germany. He also came away from the conference with

66 Italy

the impression based on what was not said that the two western powers were willing to give Italy a free hand in Ethiopia. That was more than he needed to move ahead with plans that were already formulated. In December 1934 a border incident in the oasis of Walwal heightened tensions. Mussolini pressed ahead with plans for full-scale war. Italian troops crossed the border from the Italian colonies of Eritrea and Somalia into Ethiopia on October 3, 1935. The Ethiopian War was a foreign policy turning point. Roundly condemned by most governments and by the League of Nations, it isolated Italy diplomatically. Only Germany refused to condemn the aggression, thereby earning Hitler Mussolini’s steadfast gratitude. Relations between the two countries improved steadily after 1935. The economic sanctions against Italy imposed by the League of Nations did not stop the war effort, which dragged on until Italian troops entered the Ethiopian capital on May 5, 1936, and Mussolini declared victory to an enthusiastic nation. Italian public opinion perceived the war as a settling of the old score of the Battle of Adowa and as a rightful effort to earn Italy “a place in the sun” alongside other colonial powers. Beyond that generic expectation there was a more specific intent in Mussolini’s mind. Possession of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Somalia would give Italy a strong base of operations on the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. It was no longer a question of re-creating the ancient Roman Empire around the shores of the Mediterranean Sea. Mare nostrum was not enough. Italy needed access to the oceans in order to transcend the limitations of that inland sea and reach out to other parts of the world. Victory in Ethiopia signaled a qualitative jump in Italian imperial aspirations. Carried away by visions of colonial empire, Mussolini lost interest in the affairs of central Europe, in preserving Austrian independence, and blocking Germany’s search for Lebensraum. He implicitly accepted the international role that Hitler had seen for Italy in Mein Kampf: Italy was to be a Mediterranean and African colonial power, while Germany fulfilled its destiny north of the Alps and in eastern Europe. That was the division of spheres of influence that more than anything else accounts for the formation of the Rome-Berlin Axis (1936). Italian-German friendship and cooperation were reinforced by the exchange of official visits. Mussolini received a splendid reception in Germany in September 1937, and Hitler was likewise feted in Italy in May 1938. By then the two countries were fighting on the same side in the Spanish civil war; Hitler had remilitarized the Rhineland and annexed Austria without incident. Italy’s relations with France deteriorated badly, but Mussolini still kept up the pretense of maintaining equidistance between Germany and the western democracies. A gentlemen’s agreement between Italy and Great Britain signed in January 1937 promised to respect the status quo in the Mediterranean. To Mussolini it meant defusing anger over Italian intervention in Spain and gaining precious time to pursue other goals. In November 1937 Italy joined the Anti-Comintern Pact between Germany and Japan, which was the first official understanding among the three countries that would fight as allies in World War II. The publication of the Manifesto of Fascist Racism in July 1938 made anti-Semitism official policy. It marked a startling change from the rejection of racial doctrines that Mussolini had expressed in 1934. The adoption of biological racism was not due solely to

Foreign Policy and the Road to War 67

the influence of Nazi Germany. The perceived need to separate Italians and natives in Ethiopia also played a role, but there is no doubt that Mussolini was eager to show Hitler that fascism and national socialism were aligned on the racial question. Laws banning Jews from the professions, business, and the schools followed the publication of the manifesto. In September 1938 Mussolini played the role of honest broker at the Munich Conference in what may have been the high point of his diplomatic career. But the plan that he proposed to settle the Sudeten question was perfectly compatible with what the Germans wanted for the time being. The road to that alliance was not smooth. Italy’s contacts with Japan were marginal, but not with Germany. Japan was potentially useful as an ally against the Soviet Union, Great Britain, and the United States, but the Japanese sphere of influence was far away in Asia where Italy had no ambitions. Not so the German sphere of influence, which was right next door. The distinction between the Italian and German spheres of influence mentioned earlier was a rough one that left many possibilities for friction, if not outright conflict. Italy had given up on Austria but continued to regard Hungary as a client state. German agents were active in nearby Croatia. When Italians protested their activities there, the German diplomats backed down and reassured their Italian colleagues that Germany regarded Croatia and the Balkans as being within Italy’s sphere of influence. In March 1939 German troops moved into Czechoslovakia and took over the regions of Bohemia and Moravia. Mussolini was taken aback by that move. Perhaps to redress the balance of power in Italy’s favor, but also to position Italian troops for further action against Greece and Yugoslavia, he ordered the invasion and takeover of Albania in April 1939. The next month, on May 22, 1939, Italy and Germany signed the Pact of Steel that formalized and sealed the alliance between the two regimes The Pact of Steel was an unusual diplomatic document in that it gave both signatories carte blanche to do very much what they liked and committed them to come to one another’s aid with all the forces at their disposal. That was not the language of conventional diplomacy, which normally tried to gauge and limit commitments. The pact was particularly risky for Italy because Germany was the country most likely to take the initiative and incur the risks of retaliatory action by other powers. On August 23, 1939, Germany and the Soviet Union shocked the world by concluding the Pact of Non-Aggression. That opened the way to the German invasion of Poland in September and the start of World War II. The Italians were spectators as these events unfolded. Hitler informed Mussolini but did not consult with him. The Pact of Steel had given Hitler the freedom of action that he sought and tied the hands of the Italian dictator, who approved of neither the Non-Aggression Pact nor the decision to attack Poland. On September 3, 1939, when France and Great Britain declared war on Germany, Italian diplomats faced a most difficult dilemma. On the one hand, the language of the Pact of Steel left them little room to maneuver: They should have gone to war on the side of Nazi Germany with no questions asked. On the other hand, they knew perfectly well that Italy was unprepared for war

68 Italy

militarily and financially. The army was large (Mussolini had vowed to put into the field “8 million bayonets”) but ill equipped. The most serious deficiencies were in heavy artillery and armor. Training also left much to be desired, especially that of noncommissioned officers. The first large-scale mobilization of troops revealed an appalling lack of basic facilities and equipment. Serious shortages of coal and gasoline hampered transportation and industrial production. Only about 600 of the air force’s estimated 2,300 airplanes were combat-ready. The navy was in better shape, but battleships that should have been ready were still under construction and its plans did not envision rapid action against the enemy. The primary role for the navy was to guard supply lines with the colonies. Things were no better on the economic side. Foreign currency reserves were exhausted, and the government was on the verge of bankruptcy. Years of fighting in Ethiopia and Spain had taken a toll on the armed forces and the treasury. Publicly acknowledging these deficiencies was out of the question. Mussolini felt humiliated, but agreed to inform Hitler that Italy could not join the fight without massive help from Germany. In the words of the Italian foreign minister, the list of urgently needed armaments and supplies was big enough to choke a bull. Hitler, although eager to have Italy join the fray, did not press for intervention, thus making it easier for Mussolini to announce Italian “nonbelligerency.” He was careful to avoid any mention of “neutrality,” with its memories of Italy’s defection from the Triple Alliance in 1914–15 and connotations of equidistance between the warring sides. Nonbelligerency meant that Italy was on Germany’s side, but not as a fighting partner for the time being. That face-saving formula did not sit well with the Duce, who felt that a great power could not afford to stay out of a major conflict being fought on its doorstep. Italy’s descent into war was as slow as it had been in 1914–15, but different in substance. This time there was never any chance that the government might abstain permanently or change sides. Unless Germany was defeated quickly, a most unlikely prospect in 1939, Italy would intervene at the opportune moment. Everyone was looking for signs of a quick German victory. The signs seemed clear enough in spring 1940 after Germany overran Belgium, the Netherlands, and Denmark, and the French army reeled under Germany’s blitzkrieg. In May 1940 police informers reported that ordinary people were asking themselves why the government was not going to war after years of touting war as the ultimate test of a country’s will to prevail. Shrewd businessmen who knew that the country lacked the resources and industrial apparatus to engage in a long war of attrition thought that victory was within the grasp of the Axis powers because the Germans were moving so quickly. Even the normally ultracautious Victor Emmanuel III thought that it was time to stop hesitating.

WAR

AND THE D OWNFALL OF THE FASCIST R EGIME 1940–1945 After telling his generals not to worry about the poor state of the armed forces, and that sacrificing a few thousand dead would allow him to sit at the peace table to claim a share of the spoils of war, he took the fateful step. On June 10, 1940, he announced to a frenzied crowd and somber nation listening on the radio that Italy declared war on France and Great Britain. Italy’s intervention had the effect of spreading the war beyond Europe. The short campaign that the army fought against the French in the Alps was a minor event, except that it revealed a serious lack of preparation. Given that hardly any fighting had taken place, Mussolini decided against making territorial demands on France and agreed to a separate armistice that was signed on June 24. Mussolini’s decision reveals his way of thinking about the war. Italian intervention was timed to take advantage of an impending German victory, in the expectation that it would not be so rapid as to prevent the Italians from conducting some successful military operations on their own. Without that evidence of Italy’s ability to fight independently of Germany, Mussolini’s regime would be discredited, Italy could not demand major gains, and the victory would be hollow. Hence Mussolini’s insistence that the armed forces mount a decisive campaign against the British by invading Egypt from Libya and capturing the Suez Canal. But the Libyan campaign ran into difficulties from the start. Italo Balbo was governor and commander of military operations in the colony. He died in an airplane crash, accidentally shot down by friendly fire on June 28, 1940. Marshall Rodolfo Graziani, who succeeded him, resisted Mussolini’s demands for quick action, alleging all sorts of equipment and supply deficiencies. In September his troops moved 60 miles into Egypt and took up defensive positions. British armored forces counterattacked in December and drove the Italians far back into Libya. Seeking a rapid victory elsewhere, in October 1940 Italian troops attempted to invade Greece from their bases in Albania. Bad weather prevented effective use of the air force, the infantry bogged down in the mud of the mountains, confusion reigned in the shipping ports of southern Italy where thousands of troops were assembled, the Greeks fought stubbornly, and the British rushed

70 Italy

to help them. On November 11, 1940, the British air force launched a surprise attack on Italian warships anchored in the port of Taranto and in one stroke put out of commission three capital ships. A complete debacle was narrowly avoided because the troops fought tenaciously through the winter and halted the Greek advance toward the Adriatic, but the campaign was a major embarrassment. Mussolini fumed and fired Badoglio as chief of staff. Italian forces in East Africa surrendered to the British in spring 1941. The country settled down for what now promised to be a long and hard war. The setbacks in Africa and the Balkans indicated how difficult it would be for the country to fight that kind of conflict. Mussolini had started out hoping that Italy could fight its own “parallel war” alongside Germany and earn some credible victories in short order. That was no longer possible, and he resigned himself to calling for German help. The Germans responded, knocked Yugoslavia and Greece out of the war, and Erwin Rommel led offensive operations in North Africa that brought Italian and German troops within 70 miles of Alexandria by July 1942. The British forced them back in October–November 1942. That same month Allied forces landed in North Africa and began to squeeze the Italians and Germans from east and west. Italian troops fought well in Tunisia before being evicted from that last foothold on African soil in May 1943. By then Italian cities were under steady attack from the air, the home front was beginning to crack, and Mussolini was scrambling to save his government. The defeats of 1940 left Italy at the mercy of its stronger German ally, which understandably demanded a stronger voice in Italian affairs for shouldering the greater burden. Mussolini’s strategy now shifted from one of gaining independent victories to one of making a credible effort as a subordinate partner. After Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941, he insisted on sending a large Italian expeditionary force to fight on that front. He followed Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor with an Italian declaration of war against the United States on December 11, 1941. The United States, he claimed in his war speech, was the last bastion of capitalism and the ultimate guardian of the world order that denied Italy its place in the sun. The crowd was still there to cheer him, but ordinary Italians did not see the logic behind this declaration of war. The war was becoming less national and more Fascist as it spread to parts of the world and involved countries with which Italy had no quarrel. Mussolini could still claim some gains. In 1941–42 Italian troops occupied parts of Greece, Yugoslavia, and southern France, extending Italian dominion to regions that had long been coveted by the Fascist regime. They were not puppets of the Germans. Italian commanders refused to hand over Jews and opposed German designs on the territories under their jurisdiction. None of this altered the fact that Italy was now Germany’s junior partner. Nazi leaders showed their contempt by calling Mussolini their most important Gauleiter (district leader). On July 10, 1943, came the blow that everyone expected, without knowing precisely where it would land. Allied troops landed in Sicily and marched inland, meeting little resistance from the Italian troops stationed to defend the island. Only a few days earlier Mussolini had vowed the island’s defenders would stop the invaders dead at the tideline. The discorso del bagnasciuga, as that

War and the Downfall of the Fascist Regime 71

rash pronouncement came to be known, and the fact that German troops bore the brunt of defending the island, made the loss of Sicily all the more galling. The loss of Sicily put the regime on the ropes, not from the threat of popular revolt but from disaffection at the top. Two conspiracies converged to bring down Mussolini and the regime. On the one hand, disaffected Fascists pressured Mussolini into summoning a meeting of the Grand Council, which was theoretically the highest consultive body of the regime. On the other, the king decided it was time to reassert his authority as head of state and commander in chief. Military officers still took an oath of loyalty to the king, and it was to them that Victor Emmanuel turned in the hour of crisis. Meeting far into the night of July 24–25, 1943, the Grand Council voted no confidence in Mussolini and called on the king to take command of the armed forces. That was the signal that the king was waiting for. On the afternoon of July 25, Mussolini reported to the king without suspecting what was in store. After a tense meeting, during which the king vented his resentment at Mussolini’s usurpation of royal prerogatives, the Duce was taken into custody and spirited away by an armed detachment waiting outside the king’s villa. Perhaps the most astounding aspect of the crisis of July 1943 was the absence of a Fascist response to Mussolini’s ouster. The Fascist militia and other special forces supposedly loyal to Mussolini acquiesced in the bloodless coup. When news of Mussolini’s ouster reached the people, there were celebrations in the streets and crowds attacked the monuments and symbols of the regime. But the rejoicing was premature. Marshall Pietro Badoglio, the new head of government appointed by the king, had a most difficult task ahead of him. The imperative need to get out of the war could not be acknowledged for fear of German retaliation. Badoglio promised publicly that the war would continue, but he authorized secret negotiations for an armistice with the Allies. His emissary, General Giuseppe Castellano (1893–1977), signed the secret armistice that amounted to an unconditional surrender on September 3, 1943. It was not to be announced publicly until the Italian government had taken steps to protect Rome from German retaliation with the help of Allied troops, but when the Allied commanders realized that Rome was doing little to protect itself, they went ahead and announced the armistice on September 8, 1943. The events of the next few hours had disastrous repercussions. The royal court, government, and high command left Rome in such haste that the move had all the appearances of headlong flight. Even worse, they left the army without clear orders, allowing it to dissolve into thin air within days, as officers and enlisted men jettisoned their uniforms and weapons, donned what civilian clothing they could find, and started making their way home as best they could. The Germans wasted no time in repairing the situation to their advantage. Hitler was not fooled by Badoglio’s commitment to continue fighting, and ordered additional German divisions to pour into Italy and begin taking over strategic posts and facilities. A few Italian formations opposed them bravely after the announcement of the armistice, but they were quickly overwhelmed. The Germans corralled stragglers, put them in concentration camps, and eventually shipped them to Germany as prisoners of war or to work as laborers. On

72 Italy

A U.S. armored column rolls through the streets of Palermo, Sicily, on July 22, 1943. (National Archives)

the Greek island of Cephalonia where Italian commanders, acting on their own initiative, took up arms against the Germans, thousands were massacred. Hitler still regarded Mussolini as a viable leader and a valuable asset, but Mussolini was under arrest in an unknown place. Discovering his whereabouts and freeing him became a high priority. German paratroopers carried out the daring rescue in the mountains of the Gran Sasso in the Abruzzo region and took him to Germany, where Hitler prevailed on him to return to Italy and set up a new government. Mussolini’s state of mind in those days is difficult to assess, for resuming his political career was apparently not his first choice. He later claimed that he gave in to Hitler’s request to spare Italy the threatened consequences of a hostile German occupation, but a desire for personal vindication, rancor against those who had abandoned him, particularly the king, as well as a sense of honor may have played a role in his decision to set up the Italian Social Republic that, until the last days of the war, governed those parts of Italy controlled by the Germans.

War and the Downfall of the Fascist Regime 73

Italy was a divided country from September 1943 when the armistice was signed to May 1945 when the war ended. The Allies achieved their essential military goals in Italy in 1943 with the Italian surrender, collapse of the Fascist regime, and elimination of the Italian armed forces. They gained complete control of the Mediterranean and of enough Italian territory south of the Gustav Line to launch air operations against Germany from the south. From then on, the Italian theater was of secondary importance to the Allies. After the liberation of Rome in June 1944 the Allies decided to divert forces from Italy to France and the Normandy front. The war dragged on in Italy as the Allies made slow progress up the peninsula, hampered by mountainous terrain, bad weather, and stiff German resistance. The king governed nominally in the so-called Regno del Sud (Kingdom of the South), which consisted initially of a few provinces that the Allies left under Italian administration. His situation was similar to that of Mussolini, who governed nominally in the North under even stricter German control. The Kingdom of the South, recognized by the Allies as the only legitimate Italian government, declared war against Germany and fielded an army to fight alongside the Allies. Its existence assured the juridical continuity of the Italian state in the eyes of the victorious powers. As the war continued with no end in sight, Italians found themselves at the mercy of invading armies. Left without public services and often without basic necessities, they showed immense resourcefulness. They turned to family and friends for support, sought refuge from bombardments and other ravages of war in makeshift accommodations in villages and countryside, and found ways to bypass the crumbling structures of the official economy. What public services could no longer provide enterprising individuals offered for a price. The industrious dabbled in the mushrooming black market or sought out odd jobs, like the sciuscià (shoeshine boys) of Naples who became figures of folklore. Prostitution flourished, as it always does where armies are present; the Mafia surfaced again in Sicily after having laid low for most of the Fascist period, aided perhaps by its new American connections. The enormous quantities of occupation currency from the Allied Military Administration put a lot money in the hands of Allied troops and, in the process, all but destroyed the value of the lira. Problems in the German-occupied North were of a different nature. There was more order, inflation was less severe, most public employees and industrial workers kept their jobs and were paid until the very last days of the war; the black market was less exuberant than in the South. Enterprising individuals accumulated sizable fortunes at considerable risk: they bought cheaply on the German side, transported goods illegally across the front line, and sold dearly in Allied-controlled territory where prices were high. Basic necessities could also be procured by buying directly from peasant producers, who accumulated considerable savings by selling part of their meager produce. The most serious issues were political. Mussolini’s Italian Social Republic could not shake off the negative connotations of being associated with German occupation. The thousands of Fascist diehards who rallied to its defense were a small minority. Passive resistance was more common, and more common still was the attitude of

74 Italy

attendismo (wait and see), whereby millions of Italians steered clear of politics while waiting for the Allies to arrive. By 1944 most Italians sensed that an Allied victory was only a matter of time and were not fooled by propaganda reports that German secret weapons would soon reverse the fortunes of war. Passive resistance and attendismo could develop into something more threatening for the Germans and for Mussolini’s puppet regime: They could lead to active resistance. When the government of the Social Republic called up the “class of 1924” for service in its armed forces, thousands of young men did not answer the call. They did not relish the prospect of fighting for a discredited government that was clearly on the ropes, and dreaded the very real prospect of being sent to Germany as forced laborers. They joined small groups of what the authorities called “rebels” operating in the mountains. History remembers them as the Partisans, freedom fighters who took up arms against fascism and the German occupiers. The anti-Fascist resistance arose for many reasons. Its first manifestations were in the South, but it developed fully in the North where German occupation lasted the longest. With the country split in two and politically conscious Italians taking sides one way or the other, the resistance was part civil war, part war of liberation, and part social war as communist leaders took charge of many of its formations. The Committee of National Liberation of Northern Italy (Comitato di Liberazione Nazionale per Alta Italia, or CLNAI), later renamed National Liberation Committee (CLN), became a de facto government in many parts of northern Italy. It was recognized as a legitimate authority by the Allies and by the royal government in the South. The resistance was significant militarily because it engaged thousands of German and Italian Fascist troops that otherwise would have been used against the Allies, and because it destabilized the government of the Social Republic. In the last days of the war resistance troops liberated the cities of northern Italy before Allied troops got there. The resistance was even more significant politically. Its existence showed that Italians were willing to fight for their own liberation from fascism and German occupation; it served as a crucible in which anti-Fascist groups and political parties met and mixed; it became a source of reference and inspiration after the war, when antifascism was the only ideology shared by most political parties. With the sole exception of the neo-Fascist Italian Social Movement (Movimento Sociale Italiano, or MSI) and various other right-wing groups, which together were never more than a small minority in the country, the “myth” of the resistance as a united national effort against fascism held the country together after 1945.

P OSTWAR R ECONSTRUCTION 1945–1950 The principal contenders for power in postwar Italy were the political parties born of the resistance, the Allies, the monarchy, and the church. The Italian Communist Party (Partito Comunista Italiano, or PCI) had played a major role in the resistance and had strong anti-Fascist credentials. Many of its leaders had lived in exile during the Fascist period, had fought against fascism in Spain, and had the military experience needed to take up the fight in Italy after 1943. The party’s close ties to the Soviet Union made it suspect in the eyes of the Allies, but Palmiro Togliatti, the party’s postwar leader, insisted that Communists would cooperate with other parties in the task of reconstruction and would abide by the ground rules of political democracy. Only with the onset of the cold war in 1947 did the PCI take a militant stand against the United States, adopting the Soviet line that the Marshall Plan, ostensibly about economic reconstruction, was in reality an American effort to interfere in the internal political affairs of other countries. The Italian Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano, or PSI), the other great party of the Left, felt compelled to align itself with the more popular PCI in order to maintain its credibility among workers. Its leader, Pietro Nenni, did not trust the Communists, but was equally afraid that failure to make a common front with them against the forces of reaction might lead to a resurgence of fascism, perhaps in a more moderate but still dangerous guise. Christian Democracy (Democrazia Cristiana, or DC) was the other mass party. It had played a secondary role in the resistance, but its close ties to the Catholic Church, clergy, and religious associations gave it a secure base throughout the country. These forces stepped into the power vacuum left by the collapse of state administration in the final phase of the war; they negotiated with Partisans and Allies, opposed the Communists, and played to the fears of social revolution from the left. The capable leadership of Alcide De Gasperi assured that the DC would be the party of the future. The other notable party was the Action Party. It occupied the political space between the parties of the Left and the DC, rejected communism and clericalism, and embraced social democracy. It was a prestigious party that appealed to intellectual minorities, but not the masses. Its elitist image doomed it from the start, and it succumbed to the populist spirit and partisan atmosphere of Italian politics after 1945.

76 Italy

Alcide De Gaspari (European Union)

Another victim was the monarchy, which went down to defeat in the referendum of June 1946. Its association with fascism and the war was too much of a political liability. The Allies were divided, the British supporting the monarchy and the Americans opposing it; they left the decision to the voters. The lastminute abdication of the old king in favor of his son Umberto II did not gain the monarchy enough votes nationwide. The election returns did show a division between the South, which voted for the retention of the monarchy, and the rest of the country that voted overwhelmingly for the republic. Once the monarchy was abolished, monarchists formed the National Monarchist Party (Partito Nazionale Monarchico, or PNM), which along with the neo-Fascist MSI

Postwar Reconstruction 77

(Movimento Sociale Italiano) constituted the right wing of Italian politics after the war. The constitution in effect precluded their coming to power singly or in combination, but their presence was useful. It enabled the DC to present itself as a party of the center, opposed to both fascism and communism, and deserving the support of everyone who believed in political democracy. A constituent assembly set to work on a constitution for the Italian republic. When the new constitution went into effect on January 1, 1948, it put in place the political system that prevailed until the 1990s. Its salient features were the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy, suffrage for men and women (women had already voted for the first time in the elections and referendum of 1946), protection of civil freedoms, a weak executive, dominant legislature, safeguards against fascism and dictatorship, and commitment to social welfare. The constitutional description of the state as “A democratic republic based on work” pleased the parties of the Left, which accused the dominant DC of playing to conservative interests, without spelling out precisely what it was that the republic should do for workers. That would be a contentious issue in the decades to come. Other ambiguous or contentious provisions in the constitution were also cause for debate. The constitution called for administrative decentralization and regionalism without specifying the functions and powers of local and regional councils. It endorsed the Lateran Pacts and Concordat of the Fascist regime, thereby acknowledging that the church had sole say in matters of marriage and family, including abortion, birth control, divorce, and religious instruction in the schools. Other aspects of postwar political life were related indirectly to the spirit or provisions of the constitution. The constitution said nothing about political parties, but the system of strict proportional representation that was deemed most appropriate to the democratic spirit of the constitution produced a large number of parties, none of which could rule alone for long. With few and brief exceptions, postwar Italy was governed by party coalitions that required periodic adjustments of political course. The most important element of continuity was the dominance of the DC from 1945 to the early 1990s. The coalition governments of the immediate postwar period were governments of national unity dominated by Christian Democrats with the participation of Communists and Socialists. The tensions of the cold war split the parties of the Left and put an end to their participation in government. Social democrats bolted from the PSI and formed the Italian Social Democratic Party (Partito Socialista Democratico Italiano, or PSDI), which collaborated with the DC. In May 1947 De Gasperi reshuffled his government to exclude Communists and Socialists. The decision was influenced by the imperative need not to jeopardize American economic aid that was being funneled to Italy and other European countries through the Marshall Plan. Until the 1960s the DC governed with the support of the three small parties of the center, the pro-business Italian Liberal Party (Partito Liberale Italiano, or PLI), the Italian Republican Party (Partito Republicano Italiano, or PRI), and the Italian Social Democratic Party (Partito Socialista Democratico Italiano, or PSDI). As De Gasperi intended, their support freed the DC from having to rely entirely on the Catholic vote and the support of the church.

78 Italy

Economic reconstruction took precedence in the immediate postwar years. In 1945 the Italian economy was in a dreadful state, with unemployment and inflation at record levels, savings depleted, transportation facilities destroyed, industrial output at a quarter of the 1938 level, agricultural production at 55 percent, and national income at about half of what it had been in 1938. Yet, recovery was fairly rapid. Production was back to the 1938 level within three years. By 1960 national income doubled and the economy hummed along, buoyed by exports and low labor costs. The guiding principles were monetary stability, fiscal restraint, and tight government spending, policies associated with Luigi Einaudi, an economic liberal and sound money advocate who served as deputy premier and budget minister in 1947–48. The large state-owned holding company (Istituto per la Recostruzione Industriale, or IRI), a legacy of the Fascist period, had not yet been corrupted by political patronage. It actually helped the private sector by relieving it of unprofitable industries that could not compete in the free market. By September 1949 the government had accumulated enough reserves of foreign currency and brought prices, budget, and balance of payments sufficiently under control to stabilize the exchange rate of the lira at 625 to the dollar. It remained at that level with only minor fluctuations until the 1970s, a sign that the economy had stabilized at a new plateau. The 1950s were the years of Italy’s economic miracle. The impoverished South was a source of cheap labor to the industrial cities of the North. Mass migration alleviated the plight of the South, but the economic gap between the two parts of the country continued to grow. Land reform broke up the latifundia (large estates), and redistributed some 700,000 hectares of land by 1962, benefiting 113,000 peasant families. It was only a tiny fraction of the rural population and the inexperienced and underfunded new owners did not do well. Eventually the land issue disappeared from public view and another took its place. In 1950 the government set up the Cassa per il Mezzogiorno (Fund for the South) to promote the South’s economic development. It funneled billions to the South in public and private investments. Its activities contributed to the diversification of the southern economy, parts of which did quite well while others lagged behind. Government programs did not solve the Southern Question, but they did impact southern regions in different ways. Funds flowed to selected parts of the South with the construction of expensive infrastructures and capital-intensive industrial projects. Selective industrialization had its drawbacks. It did not help the South as a whole, but it did have considerable benefits in loco. More effective were improvements in education, transportation, public health, emigrant remittances, and social welfare. By the 1980s the Southern Question had dissolved into as many questions as there were local economies in the South—this according to experts who had the specialized knowledge to understand that the South was evolving in complex and diversified ways. Public opinion, especially in the North, did not alter its view that the question of the South was really the “problem of the South.”

CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC DOMINANCE AND CENTRIST PARTY POLITICS 1948–1958 In the elections of April 1948 the Christian Democratic Party (Democrazia Cristiana, or DC) came tantalizingly close to winning an absolute majority with 48.5 percent of the popular vote. It did win a majority in the Chamber of Deputies with 305 out of 574 seats. Technically, the DC could have ruled alone, but De Gasperi chose to continue governing with party coalitions that freed the DC from having to rely entirely on the Catholic vote and the support of church and clergy. The center parties of the coalitions that governed until the end of the 1950s ranged from the pro-business Partito Liberale Italiano (PLI) to the Partito Socialista Democratico Italiano (PSDI), which was liberal in the American sense of the word. Like the DC, they were anticommunist, pro-American, and committed to parliamentary democracy. Communists and Socialists formed the opposition. In the 1948 elections, they won 31 percent of the popular vote running on a joint ticket. Anticipating an even stronger showing in the next elections, the DC introduced a bill that would have given the party or coalition of parties that won at least 50 percent of the popular vote two-thirds of the seats in the Chamber of Deputies, where governments were made and unmade. The bill passed over the vehement opposition of the parties on the Left and vocal dissidents from the center parties, who named the new law the legge truffa (swindle law). The DC and the center parties won 49.85 percent, barely short of the 50 percent needed to trigger the effect of the law, which was subsequently annulled. Thereafter, shaky coalition governments would be the norm in Italian politics. The short-lived nature and instability of governments was mitigated to some degree by the fact that the same figures served repeatedly, often playing a game of musical chairs with ministerial posts. In fact, the achievements of the governments of the 1950s were far from negligible. They confronted a domestic scene recovering from the ravages of war, plagued by high unemployment, labor strife, disorder in the streets, rampant lawlessness in many parts of the country, and regional separatism. Communist rhetoric was often at odds with the official party line of loyalty to the democratic process. Il vento del nord (the

80 Italy

wind from the north), a reference to the revolutionary thrust of the Communist Resistance, was expected to bring the proletariat to power and cleanse the country of corruption. Northern workers occupied factories and southern peasants carried out land seizures, all in the name of social justice. In Sicily, the bandit Salvatore Giuliano, said to be in the pay of the Mafia and large landlords, led a separatist movement. Following an attempt on the life of Communist leader Palmiro Togliatti on July 14, 1948, violent demonstrations broke out throughout the country. The insurgents gained control of communications facilities in central Italy and of the city of Genoa. Communists controlled the local administrations of the “Red Belt,” which comprised most of Liguria, Tuscany, and Emilia-Romagna. Whether Italy was actually on the verge of revolution after the elections of 1948 is a moot issue. The official party line imposed by Togliatti disavowed any revolutionary intentions, but close collaborators like Luigi Longo and Pietro Secchia disagreed and favored a more aggressive approach. The Communist victory in Yugoslavia and the civil war raging in Greece were worrisome developments. The center parties confronted the pressing issue of domestic security decisively. Minister of the Interior Mario Scelba was the law-and-order man of the moment. The Celere police squads mounted on American military surplus Jeeps were one response to disorder in the streets, special laws limiting civil freedoms and expanding police powers were another. The police regularly found and seized large quantities of weapons illegally stashed away by former Resistance fighters. But not all responses were repressive. Governments passed and implemented land reform measures, established the Fund for the South, and created new public agencies for economic development. Ente Nazionale Idrocarburi (ENI), set up to develop energy resources but soon branching out into road construction, gasoline distribution, and the construction of highway facilities, was the most dynamic and the one that caught the public imagination with a publicity campaign that catered to the sense of national pride. The labor front calmed down considerably in the early 1950s, partly because the labor movement split along political lines and partly because management orchestrated an effective campaign against the more aggressive unions, replacing older militants with more docile younger workers brought in from the countryside. Christian Democrats were often accused of lacking a “sense of the state,” meaning that they were prone to put the interests of their party, of their voters, and of interest groups against the general interest. More pointedly, they were charged with running a corrupt government. There is no evidence that they deliberately encouraged corrupt practices, but they did strengthen the party financially and looked after the interests of party voters and supporters. Clientelism, the dispensation of favors small and large to individuals and networks of backers, is an apt description of their political tactics. They were not the only party that operated in the manner of old-fashioned American political bosses, but as the party in power with the greatest access to the resources of government, they were the ones most vulnerable to charges of profiteering. They lost ground in the elections of 1953 with 40.1 percent of the popular vote,

Christian Democratic Dominance and Centrist Party Politics 81

recovered partially in the elections of 1958 with 42.4 percent, and slipped to 38.3 percent in 1963. Their share of the vote held steady at around 38–39 percent in the 1960s and 1970s, but the other center parties did not do as well. The gains were on the right and left, but most notably on the latter where the Communist Party popular vote rose from 22.6 percent in 1953 to 34.4 percent in 1976, coming that year close to four points behind the Christian Democrats. The Socialist Party actually declined from its high point of 14.2 percent in 1958 to 9.6 percent in 1976. The extremes were gaining at the expense of the “vital center” of the political spectrum.

T HE O PENING TO THE L EFT 1958–1980 Dwindling electoral support for the parties of the center was the mathematical reason for the shift in political alliances that began to take place in the late 1950s. Behind the shift were profound social changes. The “economic miracle” changed the character of Italian society from predominantly agricultural to predominantly industrial. A major population shift from the countryside to the cities and from south to north accompanied the change. Labor unions grew and became more militant as workers demanded an increasing share of the benefits of the economic miracle. Millions of Italians, displaced by the dislocations that economic change always entails and attracted by economic opportunities, emigrated abroad, mostly to the countries of northern Europe, South America, North America, and Australia in that order. Migration to the cities of the North from both the South and the surrounding countryside made demands on urban services that few local governments could meet. The most successful in this respect were the city administrations run by the Communists, that of Bologna being the best example. The white-collar sector of the economy, which included public services, was actually the fastest-growing, with future implications for the Communist strategy of relying on the support of workers and landless peasants. A consumer revolution was under way as Italians began to buy appliances, cars, and television sets; roads were clogged with traffic. Paradoxically, as society was becoming increasingly atomized and the culture hedonistic, the traditional attachment to family and home survived. There was continuity in change. In other words, Italy was beginning to experience all the contradictions of modernization. Social revolution is too strong a word for the changes occurring in those years, for there were still important elements of continuity with the past. Italians by and large remained culturally conservative, attached to family, traditional gender roles, and the ceremonial aspects of religion, even if they voted for the parties of the Left. Communists and Socialists were ideologically in favor of women’s rights, abortion, and divorce, but cautious in practice because they understood the mentality of most of their constituents. Feminism, the gay movement, environmentalism, and prison reform were new issues that found their strongest advocates outside the mainstream political parties. The “opening to the Left” was the cautious political response to a country moving painfully toward 82

The Opening to the Left 83

a new equilibrium. The left fringes of Christian Democracy had always favored a more open and receptive attitude toward the non-Communist left. They opposed consumerism and the “Americanization” of Italian society as much as they opposed communism. In the elections of 1958, the Christian Democratic vote rose from 40.1 percent to 42.4 percent, and the Socialist vote from 12.7 percent to 14.2 percent. Even before the elections, Amintore Fanfani, a Catholic sensitive to social problems who was the new Christian Democratic political boss, proposed an alliance with the Socialists to invigorate the governing coalition and facilitate social planning. After the elections the idea was taken up by the DC centrist group known as the Dorotei and by Aldo Moro, the new party secretary. The Dorotei and Moro dominated the DC for the next decade. An experiment in government supported by the neo-Fascists failed when street protests forced the resignation of Fernando Tambroni in 1960. U.S. president John F. Kennedy, recently elected, reversed American opposition to center-left coalitions, Pope John XXIII made known his support, and the Soviet Union of Nikita Khrushchev looked less menacing than that of Stalin. The Socialists had their own reason for wanting to cooperate with the Christian Democrats. Alliance with the Communists had not worked to their advantage, they wanted some of the fruits of power, Pietro Nenni feared that the Christian Democrats would turn to the right if the Socialists failed to collaborate, and party intellectuals argued that the Socialists could capture the state from within. In March 1962 Amintore Fanfani formed the first center-left government with the active support of the Republican and Social Democratic Parties and the passive support of Socialists, who abstained from voting against it. The government took the drastic and controversial step of nationalizing the electrical industry, legislated a tax on dividends, and made secondary schooling compulsory to the age of 14. The nationalization of the electrical industry was a bitterly contested step that Fanfani wanted in order to give the government control over energy prices and a handle on the entire economy. Ente Nazionale per l’Energia Elettrica (ENEL) was the new regulatory state agency that was supposed to rationalize the industry and reduce energy costs. In the event, it did neither. The school reform led to an explosion in university admissions that would soon have major repercussions on the social scene. Fanfani moved fast, too fast for many in and outside his party who either opposed the reforms in principle or were afraid that they might succeed all too well, to the advantage of the DC and its partners. In the regularly scheduled elections of 1963, the DC dropped from 42.4 percent to 38.3 percent of the popular vote. That setback left the party no choice but to move closer to the Socialist Party, which temporarily patched up its differences with the Social Democratic Party (presumably a sign of its new moderation) and managed to obtain 14.5 percent of the vote. Aldo Moro formed the first genuinely center-left government in December 1963. Nenni was his vice-premier, and the Socialist Antonio Giolitti, grandson of Giovanni Giolitti, was budget minister. The new government promised to enact many overdue reforms, including administrative decentralization, reform of higher education, popular housing, and the legalization of divorce. But first it had to deal with a

84 Italy

serious economic recession (the congiuntura), and may have made matters worse by taking steps to curb inflation, internal demand, and public spending. Rumors of secret plots to organize a military coup were in the air. It is highly unlikely that the army wanted or could have carried out a coup, but the rumors kept growing into the late 1960s. Three consecutive center-left governments headed by Aldo Moro from 1953 to 1968 had little to show in the way of reform. The legalization of divorce, admittedly a major development in a Catholic country like Italy, took effect in 1970 and was confirmed by popular referendum in 1974. Even more controversial was the legalization of abortion. Both measures reflected changes in social attitudes that the political parties struggled to reflect. There was a strong economic recovery in the private sector, which was derailed by the repercussions of the oil crisis of the early 1970s. The public sector grew, but its contribution to the recovery was questionable. State agencies were turning into breeding grounds for political patronage, clientelism, and ill-conceived projects that diverted capital from more productive investments. In the elections of 1972 both the Christian Democrats and the Socialists lost some ground, but the Socialists were the biggest losers, as they dropped from 14.5 percent to 9.6 percent of the popular vote. The experiment in center-left government was not working to their advantage. The center-left seemed to actually be benefiting the Communists who gained slightly; they could now present themselves as the only party of the left that was unsullied by corrupt government. Profound changes were underway by 1972. Organized workers demanded major salary and workplace concessions, university students were in open revolt, a mood of rebellion spread among the young, public services were mired in red tape, and public confidence in government was at a low point. The reasons for the crisis of the state and society that unfolded in the late 1960s and early 1970s are complicated. Poor employment prospects, particularly dire for university graduates, the Vietnam War that called into question Italy’s ties to the United States, the infectious example of the Cultural Revolution in China and of protest movements in the United States, the keen interest in Marxist social theory on the part of university students, the rejection of consumerist values, demands for gender equality and sexual liberation, encouragement of change by the Catholic Church, all these were ingredients in the explosive mix that was being brewed in the 1960s. In 1967–68 student protests erupted at the University of Trento (public but strongly influenced by Catholic liberation theology), the Catholic University of Milan, the University of Turin, and the University of Rome. The movement spread from these prominent centers of student activism to virtually every other university, and even to some secondary schools. Student protesters linked up with disgruntled workers. This was the aspect that set the Italian protest movement apart from protest movements in other countries and seemed to pose the greatest threat to the state. For by 1968–69 labor protests seemed to be on the verge of escaping the control of the labor unions and political parties with which the unions were affiliated. The workers who came into the factories in the 1960s were better educated than the

The Opening to the Left 85

workers of an earlier generation, many came from the better-off parts of the South, some had had experience working abroad, and some with no previous experience of factory work were unaccustomed to the rituals of collective bargaining. Small but active minorities were drawn to political organizations and fringe groups that promised more than salary increases and benefits. They insisted instead on giving workers a voice in the process of production, they intimidated managers, took over some factories, and proclaimed the factory as the logical birthplace of the revolution. In the autunno caldo (Hot Autumn) of 1969 the country appeared to be on the verge of revolution, as it had been in the “Red Years” of 1919–20. Grassroots worker militancy certainly prodded the labor unions into taking an aggressive stance. Collective bargaining agreements negotiated in this climate yielded great benefits to the workers in the form of higher wages, shorter working hours, longer paid vacations, and generous bonuses and pensions. The rising cost of labor was not matched by increases in productivity because the worker movement also successfully opposed the introduction of labor-saving techniques that would have speeded up assembly lines and threatened jobs. Matters took an even more ominous turn outside the workplace where the cult of violence was definitely in the air. The New Left of the 1960s was not just about flowers, peace, and making love. There was a violent component to it that was very much in evidence in Italy, where self-proclaimed revolutionary groups bent on violence proliferated in a crowded political underground. The “strategy of tension” that they adopted targeted prominent and not-so-prominent business, political, and cultural figures who were seen as part of the establishment. The intellectual fuzziness and anarchism typical of this way of thinking defied conventional political classifications and distinctions. Left and right met and mingled in the murky world of political conspirators. Their intent was to destabilize the state, bring it down, and create a better society out of the resulting chaos. What that society might look like was left to the individual imagination. Particularly upsetting to the young Marxists who rallied to extraparliamentary and underground groups of the Left was the prospect that the Communist Party (PCI) might be drawn into the political mire. That seemed a definite possibility after the elections of 1976 brought the popular vote of the PCI to within four percentage points of the DC. It seemed as if it was now poised to benefit from its embrace of political democracy by becoming a credible partner in government. The “historic compromise” (compromesso storico) between the DC and the PCI never came to full fruition, but the possibility that it might drove Marxist dissidents over the edge. Terrorism is not too strong a word for the violence that permeated public life after the explosion of a bomb that killed 16 people in front of a bank in Milan on December 12, 1969. The anni di piombo (years of lead) followed that first incident. The campaign of terror culminated in the 1978 kidnapping and assassination of Aldo Moro, whose bad luck it was to be perceived as the architect of the political system. Moro’s death did not bring down the system, but it did stop dead in its tracks the historic compromise that he and Communist Party leader Enrico Berlinguer were bent on promoting. Communist deputies cooperated

86 Italy

with government in the spirit of national solidarity, but not as legitimate partners. Moro’s death, which was supposed to deliver a fatal blow to the state, according to the conspirators, had the opposite effect. Public opinion definitely turned against the violence that many Italians had almost excused until then as an understandable reaction against corrupt and incompetent government. The reaction was firm but not exaggerated. It took into account the fact that the dissidents who practiced terror were never more than a small minority even among the disaffected. The government increased surveillance, created special antiterrorist forces (the so-called teste di cuoio—leather heads—from the masks that they wore to protect their anonymity), and gave special powers to the police and the judges, without seriously infringing on civil liberties. The antiterrorist reaction was a responsible performance that partly redeemed the state for the years of inaction and aimless drifting.

P ROFILE AND P OLITICS OF A C HANGING WORLD It was not terrorism that altered the face of Italian society after 1980, but the forces of economic change, international developments, and the will of the people. In the elections of 1979 held while the country was still feeling the trauma of the Moro assassination, the Democrazia Cristiana (DC) maintained its strength, but the Partito Comunista Italiano (PCI) popular vote dropped from 34.4 percent to 30.4 percent. The party had unequivocally denounced terrorism, but voters were not disposed to absolve it entirely of responsibility for what the country was going through. The party decided to abandon the policy of informal cooperation with the DC, leaving the dominant but struggling DC little room for political maneuvering. A bright spot on the political scene was the election of Sandro Pertini to the presidency of the republic in 1978. The patent honesty and simplicity of this old-time Socialist and anti-Fascist caught the public imagination and helped restore trust in government. In 1981 Pertini used his presidential power to invite Giovanni Spadolini, of the PRI, to become prime minister. For the first time since 1945 the prime minister was not Christian Democrat. This seemingly superficial novelty had in reality profound political implications. However, the significance was not immediately evident because Spadolini headed two short-lived governments in the course of 16 months. The elections of 1983 dealt a disastrous blow to the DC, which dropped from 38.3 percent to 32.9 percent of the popular vote; the Socialist vote rose from 9.8 percent to 11.4 percent. The way was open for the Socialist leader, Bettino Craxi, to become prime minister, and to hold that post for a postwar record of four years. Public opinion welcomed the stability that a long tenure brought to politics and rewarded the Socialist Party with 14.3 percent of the popular vote in the elections of 1987. But Craxi’s dynamic personality and longevity in office proved to be mixed blessings. He became the target of heated and sometimes vicious attacks by political opponents and in the media. He was accused of corruption and of harboring dictatorial ambitions, likened to Mussolini. Governing coalitions headed by Christian Democrats followed Craxi’s resignation, and they were all hampered by the growing rivalry between Socialists, who had sharpened their appetite for power, and Christian Democrats loath to surrender to their Socialist partners and rivals. By the end of the 1980s the political system that had been in place for nearly 45 years was at the end of its rope, the public debt was

88 Italy

at dizzying heights, inflation rampant, capital draining out of the country, and confidence in government at an all-time low. International developments dealt the final blows to a system that had reached a dead end all by itself. A close relationship with the United States, allegiance to NATO, fear of the Soviet Union, and opposition to communism had been constants of Italian foreign policy since the end of World War II. Craxi had struck an independent note by questioning American hegemony and gotten in trouble for it. The American connection was an integral part of the system of power that could not be questioned. The end of the cold war did what Craxi could not do, by removing the threat of Soviet power and thereby diminishing the value of NATO and America as impediments to communism. The end of the cold war removed these important props to the system and potentially opened the way to major changes unthinkable just a few years before. Political and business leaders became the targets in the Mani Pulite and other corruption scandals in the early 1990s. The investigations were led by judges who claimed to be apolitical, but the fact that most of the accused belonged or had ties to the Socialist and Christian Democratic Parties suggested the presence of political motivations. The public initially supported the investigations and the examining magistrates, but lost interest as the process dragged on interminably and as it became clear that it was not easy to blame individuals for practices that seemed to be universal. At the start of the 21st century, 10 years after the investigations began, it seemed to be business as usual in the area of public life where economics met with politics. Institutional reform of government made slightly more headway. Public opinion polls and political referenda showed strong support for reforming voting procedures, abolishing the system of proportional representation, and strengthening the presidency. Those were precisely the reforms that did not sit well with political parties, but political parties were now in crisis and fighting for survival. Secret voting by deputies was abolished in 1988 to eliminate the tendency of “free-shooters” to vote down bills approved by their parties that they did not dare oppose openly. In 1993 parliament introduced single-member districts for 75 percent of the seats in the legislature, the other 25 percent still being represented proportionally. That did not reduce the number of parties. As the old ones died out, new ones appeared. The Christian Democrats, Socialists, Communists, and neo-Fascists voted themselves out of existence, but were reborn with different names and philosophies. The Movimento Sociale Italiano (MSI) renounced fascism and became the National Alliance (Alleanza Nazionale, or AN) under the leadership of Gianfranco Fini; the PCI renounced communism and was reborn as the Democratic Party of the Left (Partito Democratico della Sinistra, or PDS). DC members migrated to other parties of their choice, but some chose to stay on under the old label of the Popular Party (Partito Popolare Italiano, or PPI). The greater novelty was the rise of completely new parties. The most prominent was Forza Italia (Go, Italy!) founded by Silvio Berlusconi, which by its very name expressed the kind of national pride voiced by sports fans cheering on their favorite team. The Northern League founded by Umberto Bossi was an even greater novelty because it seemed to

Profile and Politics of a Changing World 89

call into question the sacrosanct traditions of the Risorgimento and the achievement of national unity. The general elections of 1994 were the first to be held by the new rule of single-representative constituencies, with the participation of a new panoply of political parties. The Liberty Pole coalition comprising Forza Italia, the National Alliance, and the Northern League won a majority of seats in the lower house of parliament, enough for Berlusconi to form his first government. It rested on an uneasy alliance between the ultrapatriotic National Alliance (which won big in the South and in Rome), the only slightly less patriotic Forza Italia, and the Northern League, whose patriotism was directed toward Padania, an imaginary separate nation of the north. The electoral reform having failed to stabilize the system (there were still 14 parties in parliament), it became necessary to call for early elections. This time it was the Olive Tree Coalition (L’Ulivo) that prevailed and inaugurated five years of left-of-center governments headed by Lamberto Dini, Romano Prodi, Massimo D’Alema, and Giuliano Amato. They had the unenviable task of preparing Italy for admission to the European Monetary Union by 1999, which required strict spending limits on government and

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi (left) and President George W. Bush in 2001 (Hulton/Archive)

90 Italy

reductions of social expenditures. To nearly everyone’s surprise the center-left coalition succeeded, but success rendered it superfluous. The House of Freedoms, Berlusconi’s new coalition, won majorities in both houses of parliament in the elections of 2001. The coalition was more stable this second time around because the Northern League and National Alliance were chastened by electoral losses and were subordinate to an invigorated Forza Italia. In the year 2004 Berlusconi seems poised to break the postwar record for longevity in power set by Bettino Craxi. Major economic, social, and cultural developments were behind these political changes. The media dismissed the 2001 elections as a popularity poll between Berlusconi and the head of the rival coalition, the former mayor of Rome, Francesco Rutelli. Public opinion polls held before the elections showed that most voters did indeed prefer the young and photogenic Rutelli, but that they still intended to vote for Berlusconi’s political right. It was not looks that swayed voters, but programs and promises. Berlusconi’s coalition promised privatization of public services, less waste in government, lower taxes, and economic prosperity. Close relations with America, a country that Berlusconi regards as the standard bearer of freedom throughout the world, are at the heart of Berlusconi’s foreign policy. He is lukewarm toward the European Union, which he regards with suspicion because of its tendency to interfere in the internal affairs of member nations. To the extent that Forza Italia has an ideology, it is one of individualism, free-market economy, and indifference if not contempt for intellectual and nonproductive endeavors. Last but not least, Berlusconi also appealed to national pride, a sentiment previously soft-pedaled outside the far right. The fact that he is under suspicion of having engaged in bribery and other corrupt practices as a businessman does not make him less popular. He personifies the ideology of individual success that appeals to a generation of voters who have reached maturity in the age of triumphant consumerism. This is not to say that his pro-business attitude is rooted in traditional economic liberalism or that his patriotism derives from political currents born of the Risorgimento. He is a new phenomenon without roots in tradition. The changes underlying the Berlusconi phenomenon are traceable to the 1980s, when the country overcame the economic and political crises of the preceding decade and took the road that made it the fifth or sixth economic power of the world. Italy’s economic rise benefited from expansion of all the economies of the western world in that decade. It was marked by management’s successful counteroffensive against organized labor. Fiat led the fight in 1980 when it fired thousands of workers for business reasons and defeated a protest strike backed by the PCI leadership. Business consolidations and shake-outs thinned the ranks of industrial workers throughout that decade, sending the labor movement on a slide from which it never recovered. Most new jobs were in the services and white-collar occupations that were most resistant to unionization. Also, the biggest expansions occurred in small businesses, an area of economic strength where unions were weak. The indexation of wage increases to the rise in the cost of living, a feature of many labor contracts, was abolished in 1992. There was also an influx of cheap foreign labor,

Profile and Politics of a Changing World 91

both legal and illegal, that undercut the ability of unions to negotiate advantageous contracts for their members. The presence of foreign laborers in turn inflamed xenophobic resentments that played into the hands of the Northern League, National Alliance, and Forza Italia, the three parties that donned the mantle of patriotism and were also pro-business. At the start of the 21st century, Italy stands at a crossroads. Membership in the European Union requires adjustments that not everyone welcomes. Stringent budgetary requirements that apply to all members may hinder the ability to deal with national problems and issues. Pensions are a most difficult issue for Italy because its population is aging, the labor force is shrinking, and funding is a costly business. The government reforms of the 1990s have not gone far enough, and political instability is a permanent problem. Italian foreign policy has to adjust to the changes brought on by the end of the cold war. Italy now stands on the world’s most unstable political fault line, the one that separates the prosperous countries of the Northern Hemisphere from the impoverished countries to the south. During the cold war Italy was situated geographically on the second line of defense; now it stands on the frontline. Being shielded from war has been a great blessing, but it has done little to prepare public opinion for new responsibilities. Italian defense spending has seldom exceeded 2 percent of the national budget since the 1950s; that may have to change. Its Mediterranean position, proximity to the trouble spots of the Middle East, and the vulnerability of its exposed territory and transportation facilities make it a prime target for political terrorism. Foreign policy is not formed in a vacuum. For it to change there must be changes at home, and Italians are not likely to agree on an international role for the country unless they can come together at home. The political system may have to change for that to happen. The issues of the moment are serious but not unmanageable. There is public support for a decisive fight against organized crime; the state of public finances was worse in the recent past, when government rose to the challenge; in 2003 budgets deficits were high, but not as high as those of France and Germany. Regional tensions are less intense than they were a decade ago. Correctives to the denounced ills of rampant individualism and the loss of social cohesiveness exist in the traditional institutions of family and strong attachment to the local community. In Italy, public mindedness and civic spirit flourish at the local level. In the economy also, small is beautiful. Small-scale business firms are still the backbone of the Italian economy, a useful corrective to the impersonal nature and potential for massive corruption of large-scale businesses. In 2004, the financial difficulties experienced by FIAT and other major firms, as well as the Parmalat financial scandal, are reminders of the familiar shortcomings of big business. None of this, however, is exclusively Italian. Italy’s future will most likely resemble that of other Western nations, particularly that of its partners in the European Union. If history is any guide, Italians will meet the new challenges with their customary flair for combining the old with the new.

HISTORICAL DICTIONARY A–Z

A abortion The campaign to legalize abortion in Italy was spurred by the apparent frequency of illegal abortions. The campaign for abortion on demand gained momentum after the legalization of DIVORCE in 1970. The Catholic hierarchy, the dominant Christian Democratic Party, and many doctors and nurses opposed the feminist-led campaign. “A woman’s right to choose” proved to be a popular slogan that found broad support even among Catholics. The fight for abortion was led in parliament by the small but vocal RADICAL PARTY and by Socialists. Parliament legalized abortion in July 1975, but the controversial Law 194 regulating it was not passed until May 1978. The law allows unrestricted abortion in the first 90 days of pregnancy, but restricts its use progressively after that point, allowing it in the final stages of pregnancy only to save the life of the mother. About two-thirds of the country’s doctors refused to perform abortions after its legalization, but enough cooperated to make possible about 200,000 legal abortions every year in the first years after passage of the law. Annual rates of induced abortions have declined from about 16 per 1,000 women ages 15–49 in the early 1980s to less than 10 per 1,000 in the late 1990s. Currently, about 150,000 legal abortions are being performed every year, and perhaps an additional 50,000–60,000 illegal abortions in advanced stages of pregnancy. Organized opposition from the Catholic Church forced two national referenda on the issue in May 1981. An overwhelming 88.5 percent of voters rejected a Radical Party demand for freely chosen abortion, while 67.9 percent turned down a Catholic proposal to strictly limit abortion to cases of immi-

nent danger to a woman’s life or health. Catholic groups continue to wage their fight against legalized abortion, with little chance of repealing a measure that enjoys broad popular support. The figures indicate that abortions contribute significantly to the negative growth rates of the population in recent years (in 1999, for instance, the population registered a natural loss of over 34,000).

Abravanel, Judah (ca. 1465–ca. 1535) Jewish scholar of Spanish origin influential in Italian humanist circles Also known as Leone Ebreo, Judah Abravanel (also spelled Abarbanel) was the son of the Jewish theologian Isaac Abravanel (1437–1508). Father and son fled from Portugal to Spain in 1483 to escape persecution. Judah fled from Spain to Naples, which was then under Spanish rule, after the Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492. In Naples he served as personal physician to the Spanish viceroy, then moved on to Genoa, Rome, and perhaps Venice. In Italy, Abravanel discovered NEOPLATONISM and became one of its most influential advocates. His most important work, the Dialoghi d’amore (Dialogues on love, 1535), developed the Neoplatonist concept of love as the binding force of the universe. Love, according to Abravanel, enables the intellect to appreciate higher levels of truth and beauty, eventually drawing the individual to spiritual union with God. The Dialoghi were widely read in Europe, helping to spread Neoplatonism in Italy and beyond. It is thought that Abravanel’s writings influenced GIORDANO BRUNO and Baruch Spinoza. 95

96 Abruzzo

Abruzzo (or Abruzzi) The region of Abruzzo (pop. 1.3 million), lies in the central part of the peninsula, bordered on the north by the region of the MARCHES, on the west by LATIUM, the south by MOLISE, and on the east by the ADRIATIC SEA. Its capital city of L’Aquila is located in the heart of the APENNINES. It is a picturesque town still completely surrounded by medieval walls, rich in churches and monuments dating from the Middle Ages, with relatively few tourists in spite of recent road and other transportation improvements. The region’s other principal cities and provincial capitals are Chieti, Pescara, and Teramo. The region is divided topographically into two distinct areas. A mountainous western part includes the highest elevations of the Apennines (the peak of the Gran Sasso at 9,558 feet [2,914 meters] above sea level, and the massif of the Maiella at 8,168 feet (2,795 meters). The eastern hilly area slopes down gradually to the coastal towns and beaches of the Adriatic coast. The region’s rivers that flow from the mountains to the Adriatic provide hydroelectric power, but are of limited use for purposes of agricultural irrigation. The temperate climate of the coastal region contrasts sharply with the cold temperatures and abundant snowfalls of the mountains. Agricultural production has been hampered by the prevalence of small properties, a characteristic of mountain regions that is especially marked in Abruzzo. In the past, the mountains have provided a steady stream of emigrants to the cities and to foreign countries. Today the region is one of the most sparsely populated in the country. Commercial agriculture has made some progress in the hilly regions at elevations below about 2,000 feet (600 meters). Grapes, olives, flowers, and horticultural products destined for Roman markets are the major commercial crops grown in the region. Forests of ash, chestnut, oak, and beech prevail at elevations of 2,000–2,600 feet (600–800 meters) and higher. Pastoral activities are in decline. Almost gone is the traditional pattern of transhumance (migration of sheep from the mountains to the plains in early fall, returning to the mountains in the

spring). Industrial production is limited to a few areas, most notably around the town of Pescara on the Adriatic coast. Fishing is still an economically significant activity. Tourism is growing, due mostly to the natural attractions of the region. Winter sports are popular in the mountains, and both mountains and beaches attract summer vacationers. The Parco Nazionale d’Abruzzo, the largest national park in the country with more than 98,800 acres (40,000 hectares) of protected land, is home to the country’s last surviving wild bears, wolves, deer, and wildcats. Although located in central Italy, the region is considered to be part of the South. It was the northernmost province of the KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES before national unification. The region’s struggling economy qualified it for inclusion in the CASSA PER IL MEZZOGIORNO, the government agency charged with promoting the economic development of the South.

Abyssinia See ETHIOPIA. academies private local societies that promoted cultural activities and civic involvement In the 15th and 16th centuries the term accademia designated any organized group of professional or dilettante scholars coming together for purposes of study. Founded and named after Plato’s Academy in ancient Athens, the academies helped propagate the culture of HUMANISM. Artistic, literary, and philosophical interests prevailed, but the academies also played a role in propagating interest in experimentation and the study of nature. The first academy was the Accademia Fiorentina formed in FLORENCE in the 1460s under the patronage of COSIMO and LORENZO DE’ MEDICI to further the study of Plato’s philosophy. It folded shortly after the death of Lorenzo in 1492, but by then the example had caught on in other cities and spread further in the 1500s, becoming a veritable movement. Many of the new academies were little more

Action Party 97

than private clubs operating for the benefit of their members. The most prestigious were the Accademia della Crusca founded in Florence in 1582 and the Accademia dei Lincei founded in Rome in 1603. The Roman group consisted of younger scholars interested in literature, mathematics, and natural history. GALILEO was a member. The Accademia della Crusca turned to the study of language, and in 1612 published its famous Vocabolario della Crusca, which helped to make Tuscan the language of educated Italians. Another Roman academy founded in 1690, the Arcadia Romana, gave its name to the Arcadian movement, which set out to reform and purify the language of poetry. When the pastoral style of the Arcadian writers became itself an affectation, as stylized and ornate as the language it had sought to replace, anti-Arcadian writers carried on the linguistic campaign that the Arcadians had initiated. An innovative feature of Arcadian societies was that they were open to women, who through them gained a foothold in literary circles. Many academies took on fanciful names of uncertain meaning and derivation, such as the Addormentati (Sleepers) and Confusi (Confused) of Genoa, Intronati (Stunned) and Rozzi (Uncouth) of Siena, and the Erranti (Wanderers) of Brindisi. The diffusion of academies promoted interest in literature, science, and scholarship in minor cities and towns. Many still function. Often derided as frivolous and amateurish, academies have played a vital role in Italian culture.

the architects of the short-lived pacification pact between Fascists and Socialists that was concluded in August 1921. He also helped transform the Fascist movement into a regular political party. Considered a moderate, a few weeks before the march on Rome Acerbo announced the Fascist Party’s support for the monarchy, thus removing a major obstacle to the appointment of BENITO MUSSOLINI as prime minister. Acerbo sponsored the electoral reform bill approved by parliament in July 1923, commonly known as the Acerbo Law. The new law abolished the system of proportional representation and assigned twothirds of the seats in the chamber to the party or coalition of parties with at least 25 percent of the popular vote. That law gave the Fascists and their allies control of parliament in the elections of April 1924. That same year Acerbo received the title of baron of Aterno. Accused of complicity in the murder of GIACOMO MATTEOTTI, Acerbo stepped down from his cabinet post as undersecretary of state. He returned to the government as minister of agriculture (1929–35) and served as minister of finance from February to July 1943. A member of the Fascist Grand Council, on July 25, 1943, he voted for the motion of no confidence that toppled Mussolini’s dictatorship. He escaped Fascist retribution by going into hiding. Eventually tried and sentenced for his role in the regime, Acerbo was pardoned after serving two years of a 30-year sentence.

Action Party (Partito d’Azione) Acerbo, Giacomo (1888–1969) Fascist figure and legislator active in the early days of fascism Born near Pescara, Acerbo studied agrarian science, volunteered for military service in WORLD WAR I, organized war veterans, joined the Fascist Party in August 1920, and founded the first Fascist squad in his native Abruzzo region. The following year he was elected to the Chamber of Deputies on the Fascist ticket, served as secretary of the Fascist parliamentary delegation, and chaired an economic commission. He was one of

anti-Fascist political party with roots in the resistance movement The Action Party sought to unify noncommunist groups opposed to fascism during and immediately after WORLD WAR II. Founded in 1942, it was inspired by ideals of social democracy and attracted the support of prominent members of the anti-Fascist movement GIUSTIZIA E LIBERTÀ. The Action Party played a prominent role in the RESISTANCE. Seeking a radical break with the past, and national renewal, the Action Party was uncompromisingly anti-monarchist, anti–big

98 Acton, John Francis Edward

business, and pro-labor. It called for regional and local autonomies, economic reform, special programs to help the South, and European federation. FERRUCCIO PARRI was its austere and idealistic founder and leader. Two other prominent azionisti, UGO LA MALFA and EMILIO LUSSU, represented two distinct currents within the party. La Malfa’s group favored small and medium-sized business, while Lussu’s favored labor, land reform, and the development of the South. Parri headed the first postwar government (June–November 1945) that began the difficult transition to peacetime. It disarmed the resistance, led in the campaign to abolish the monarchy, and began purging Fascists from government. The party’s achievements did not improve its popular image, which was one of being overly intellectual and out of touch with the common people. It was also the object of unremitting attacks by the Communist Party (PCI) and the Christian Democratic Party (DC). The elections of 1946 gave the Action Party only 1.5 percent of the popular vote; the party dissolved and its members joined other political groups.

Acton, John Francis Edward (1736–1811) English supporter of the Neapolitan Bourbon monarchy Born in France to a family of English baronets, Acton served with distinction in the French and Tuscan navies before being invited to reorganize the Neapolitan navy in 1778. Favored by Queen MARIE CAROLINE, to whom he was linked romantically by court gossip, Acton served as navy minister and as prime minister (1785–1806). He promoted administrative, naval, and military reforms, gaining respect for his political acumen. Acton’s influence increased immeasurably after 1799 when the armies of NAPOLEON forced the Neapolitan rulers to abandon their capital and withdraw to Sicily. The court returned to Naples when the pro-French PARTHENOPEAN REPUBLIC fell later that year, remaining in the capital until 1806, when the French once again forced them back to Sicily. But by 1806 Acton had incurred

the displeasure of the royal couple. His preference for Great Britain over Austria displeased the queen, who was the daughter of Empress MARIA THERESA of Austria. Acton seemed more interested in keeping Sicily under British protection than regaining the mainland, as the Neapolitan rulers urged him to do. An ill and dispirited Acton resigned as prime minister in August 1806. In retirement he regained the queen’s goodwill but not his political influence. When he died in 1811, the Neapolitan rulers were still in Sicily under the protection of the British navy.

Adelfi See SECRET SOCIETIES. Adowa, Battle of See BARATIERI, ORESTE; COLONIALISM.

Adrian VI (1459–1523) pope (1522–1523) Born Adrian Florensz at Utrecht in the Netherlands, Adrian succeeded LEO X as a compromise choice. As a young clergyman, he had served as tutor to the future emperor CHARLES V. Adrian became cardinal in 1517. Interested in learning, and particularly attracted to the ideas of reformminded religious humanists, Adrian had little interest in the secular aspects of Renaissance culture, was a tight spender, and insisted on purging the Catholic Church of corrupt practices like simony (the purchase of spiritual benefits and religious offices) and nepotism (the appointment of relatives to lucrative positions). Nor was he a strong believer in the temporal rights of the PAPACY, which he thought embroiled the church in political affairs and distracted it from its spiritual duties. Neither the papal court nor the Roman populace cared much for him. At his death after only 20 months in office, the Roman crowd cheered the physician who had attended to him in his last days. His successor, CLEMENT VII, did not pursue the reforms favored by Adrian

agriculture 99

and left the way open to the advance of Protestantism. Adrian was the last non-Italian pope before the election of JOHN PAUL II in 1978.

Adriatic Sea See MEDITERRANEAN SEA. Africa, Italian colonies in See BARATIERI, ORESTE; COLONIALISM; RUBATTINO, RAFFAELE; SAPETO, GIUSEPPE.

AGIP (Azienda Generale Italiana Petroli) agency for the exploration, production, and distribution of energy resources AGIP was established in 1926 as a governmentcontrolled operation to prospect for oil, extract, refine, and market its findings, as part of the Fascist regime’s developing campaign to reduce reliance on imported fuels. Its explorations yielded little of value in the short run, including in Libya where oil was detected but could not be brought to the surface by the technology of the day. AGIP was more successful in Iraq and Romania, where its findings gave the Italian oil industry its first foothold in these oil-rich lands. AGIP was not producing enough to significantly alleviate national dependence on foreign sources by the time the country went to war in 1940. Gas discoveries in the Po Valley in 1946 and 1949 gave it a new lease on life. When it was absorbed by ENI in 1953, AGIP was producing more than 2 billion cubic meters of methane gas and supplying 9.4 percent of the country’s energy needs.

Pietro Agnesi, had with his three wives. Her father took a great interest in her education and hired capable private tutors. At age nine, reportedly already fluent in Greek, Hebrew, Latin, French, German, Italian, and Spanish, Agnesi published a Latin translation of an essay written by one of her tutors advocating higher education for women. An admirer of Sir Isaac Newton, as a young woman she engaged in philosophical debates and pursued her interests in the natural sciences, presenting her views in the book Propositiones philosophicae (1738). Her most famous publication was a two-volume textbook, Istituzioni analitiche ad uso della gioventù italiana (Analytical precepts for the use of Italian youth, 1748–49), which brought together the elements of algebra and calculus for beginners. The book brought her international recognition, a papal letter of commendation, and an offer of appointment from the University of Bologna. It is not clear whether she accepted the appointment or ever taught. She insisted on living a simple life out of the public eye, in near seclusion, concentrating on the solitary study of religion and mathematics. After the death of her father in 1752 she expended most of her considerable inheritance on charitable works. She is remembered most often today for her cubic curve known as the “Witch of Agnesi.” The term “witch” in this case has no connection with witchcraft. It is a corruption of the Latin term versoria (a turning around) into the Italian versiera, or wife of the devil, a most unfair and cruel development for someone so pious.

agriculture Agnelli family See FIAT. Agnesi, Maria Gaetana (1718–1799) scholar and mathematician, author of pioneering texts for teaching mathematics Born to a family of Milanese silk merchants, she was the oldest of the 21 children that her father,

Agriculture was the backbone of the Italian economy until the middle of the 20th century. The prevalence of hilly and mountainous territory in the peninsula, the diversity of terrain, microclimates, and labor techniques have made Italian agriculture extremely diversified. The products are diversified, and so are the forms of habitat, employment, family organization, and land tenure associated with agriculture. Geography

100 AIDS

and history have both played a role. Where water is abundant and irrigation technically feasible, as in the Lombard plains of the Po Valley, a highly developed, capital-intensive, market-oriented agriculture developed in early modern times to serve the needs of growing urban populations. In the South, where water was scarce, labor plentiful, and urban growth limited, production took place on large estates (latifundia). Unlike the commercial agriculture of the North, which provided city markets with a broad range of goods, southern agriculture specialized in the production of cereals for export. In central Italy a form of sharecropping known as MEZZADRIA supported family-based agriculture that aimed to satisfy the needs of both the producers and the market. In the lowlands and hills of Tuscany, the Marches, and Umbria where mezzadria prevailed, the major crops were olives, grapes, cereals, and a variety of fruit and vegetables. At the higher elevations in the ALPS and APENNINES, peasant families aimed at attaining maximum self-sufficiency, minimizing recourse to market, and seeking supplementary sources of income outside agriculture, often by resorting to emigration (see MOUNTAINS, PROBLEM OF THE). Families concentrated on producing a few staple crops like chestnuts, maize, or rye, and tending sheep and goats for their milk and milk products. Mountain agriculture aimed at survival rather than profit. The course of agricultural production has also been influenced by political developments at home and abroad. Governments have taken different approaches to LAND REFORM. Public and private programs of land reclamation have brought new lands under cultivation. Reclaimed lands in the lower Po Valley have become important producers of commercial crops like sugar beets, maize, and wheat. The production of cereals was stimulated enormously by the policy of AUTARKY adopted by the Fascist regime. The agricultural policies pursued today by the EUROPEAN UNION favor enterprises that are internationally competitive, encourage specialization, and adopt labor-saving techniques. Italian agriculture is responding with mechanization, increased use of

artificial fertilizers, cheap immigrant labor, and better marketing. In spite of these advances, the role of Italian agriculture in the national economy has declined steadily. In the 1860s, agriculture accounted for about two-thirds of the gross national product. Its share fell to about half at the start of the 20th century, and to about a quarter in the 1950s. In 1998, agriculture contributed only 2.6 percent to the gross national product, and accounted for 6 percent of total employment. The shifting of population out of agriculture into the manufacturing and service industries has been accompanied by a general increase in income levels. The decline of Italian agriculture is part of a larger trend evident in all the advanced economies of the western world and of the greater integration that is the most important aspect of the global economy.

AIDS The first case of AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) was diagnosed in Italy in 1983. There were sharp yearly increases in the number of diagnosed cases from the late 1980s to the mid 1990s, the highest number of 5,659 occurring in 1995. There was a significant drop thereafter, down to 1,926 in 1998, the last year for which official figures are available. From 1982 to 1999, there were a total of 44,183 cases diagnosed, the highest number of 13,277 registered in the region of Lombardy, the lowest number of 31 in the region of Molise. The highest concentrations were in the urban centers of northern Italy and in Rome. Nearly half the diagnosed cases (21,281) were reportedly attributable to intravenous drug use, 6,619 to homosexual contact, and 5,320 to heterosexual contact. Making drug use a crime in 1990 led to a sharp increase in the number of prison inmates afflicted with AIDS. On the related issue of HIV infections, women and infants account for about 20 percent of cases and prison inmates for about one-third. Annual HIV infection increases were estimated at 5,000–10,000 in the late 1990s. Less than one third of all subjects infected by HIV are thought

Alberoni, Giulio 101

to be receiving treatment. A national campaign to control the spread of HIV infection was organized in 1987–90 after parliament adopted legislation to protect the confidentiality of medical tests. Advocates of coordinated public health measures to stop the spread of AIDS, including public education on the use of and free distribution of condoms, had to overcome the political opposition of the CATHOLIC CHURCH and the Christian Democratic Party (DC). An internationally organized and highly controversial gathering of homosexuals held in Rome in July 2000 ignited debate on gay sex and AIDS. Sex education in schools, thought to be an effective way of controlling AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, is a hotly debated issue. While Italians are very much aware of the presence of AIDS, political groups have approached the issue with caution and reluctance (see GAY MOVEMENT).

Aix-la Chapelle, Peace of See AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION, WAR OF THE.

Albania Located on the Balkan shore at the entrance to the ADRIATIC SEA and separated from Italy by only 50 miles of water, Albania has long attracted the attention of whatever power happens to dominate the Italian peninsula. In the 11th century the Republic of VENICE established colonies in the territory of modern Albania to secure safe passage into the MEDITERRANEAN SEA. In the 13th century Albania was ruled by the Angevin dynasty of NAPLES. In the 15th century Venice and Naples supported the unsuccessful Albanian struggle against the Ottoman Turks. It remained under Turkish rule until 1913, when the European powers recognized the political independence of Albania largely because Austria and Italy could not agree on how to dispose of its territory. Austrians, Greeks, Italians, and Serbians contended for control of Albania during WORLD WAR I. The PARIS PEACE CONFERENCE ratified Albanian independence in 1919 on the basis

of national self-determination. Italian influence increased steadily after 1925 as Albania became increasingly dependent on Italian economic and financial help. Its ruler, Ahmed Zogu, who was crowned King Zog in 1928, tried to resist Italian encroachment. In April 1939 Italy invaded Albania militarily, King VICTOR EMMANUEL III adding the title of king of Albania to his other royal titles. Italy used Albania as a staging ground for its attack on Greece in WORLD WAR II. After the war a newly independent Albania was ruled for 40 years by a communist regime led by Enver Hoxha, a leader of the anti-Fascist resistance during World War II. In those years of mounting international isolation for Albania, Italian influence was felt largely through television, Italian programs that easily reached the country giving Albanians visions of Western affluence and lifestyles unimaginable in their impoverished land. The collapse of the communist regime was followed in the early 1990s by a mass exodus of tens of thousands of Albanian refugees to Italy, prompting Italian countermeasures to stem the flow. In 1992 the Italian army sent troops back into Albania, this time on humanitarian missions to oversee the distribution of food aid and provide security in an increasingly tense and lawless situation. Operation Pelican, as the relief mission was called, was subsequently formally taken over by the EUROPEAN UNION, but Italy remains an important player as Albania goes through the transition toward a free-market economy and political democracy.

Alberoni, Giulio (1664–1752) cardinal and political figure Born in Piacenza of humble parentage, Alberoni was educated by the Jesuits and ordained a priest in 1689. Early on he demonstrated a talent for ingratiating himself with influential people who could further his career. In 1696 he followed his patron, Bishop Giorgio Barni of Piacenza, to Rome, where he continued his education. Alberoni began his diplomatic career in 1702 as a part of a mission sent by the duke of

102 Albertario, Davide

Parma to negotiate with French forces during the WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION. Alberoni took over the mission a year later and remained in French service until 1708. In 1710 he accompanied the duke of Vendoˆme, the French commander, on a diplomatic mission to Spain, where they successfully championed the candidacy of the grandson of King Louis XIV of France, who reigned as Philip V (1700–46). In 1713 Louis XIV promoted Alberoni’s appointment as envoy of the duchy of PARMA at the Spanish court. He was instrumental in arranging the marriage of Elisabetta Farnese to the recently widowed Philip V in 1714. The marriage made Alberoni the most influential courtier and adviser at the court of Spain. In that capacity, Alberoni promoted administrative and military reforms to revive the declining power of the Spanish monarchy. He improved the collection of revenues, reformed the currency, expanded manufacturing, modernized the merchant marine, established model farms, and curtailed smuggling. In 1717 he was made cardinal. His fortunes began to decline as the Spanish monarchy embarked on a series of military adventures, starting with a successful invasion of SARDINIA (1717) and a failed invasion of SICILY (1718). Alberoni was blamed for the war with England and France that broke out as a result of these initiatives. His life in danger, Alberoni left Spain in 1719, only to be arrested and tried in ROME on charges of having abused his power. He was exonerated after a three-year trial that ended in 1723. He served several popes during the remaining years of his life, most notably as legate for the Romagna provinces of the PAPAL STATES (1735–43). In 1732 he founded an ecclesiastical college in his native Piacenza, to which he bequeathed all his possessions.

went on to obtain a degree in theology from the Gregorian University of Rome in 1868. He was ordained into the priesthood a year later in Milan. This “journalist priest” immediately took up the conservative Catholic crusade against the Italian state inspired by Pope PIUS IX, joining the staff of the Milanese paper L’Osservatore Cattolico. He became its director in 1870, and immediately accentuated its conservative bent with the slogan Col Papa e per il Papa (With the Pope and for the Pope), challenging not only the liberal state but also Catholics who hoped for the reconciliation of CHURCH AND STATE. Albertario urged Catholics to boycott the state by staying away from the polls and to demand a national Catholic university to train future leaders of the movement. He looked to the rural masses to counteract liberal influences. Polemical and outspoken, he aroused strong feelings for and against his person and his views. His clerical superiors censured him after he criticized the policies of Pope LEO XIII as too liberal. The censure did not make him less popular among young activists who flocked to him. His slogan Preparazione nell’astensione (Preparation in abstention) expressed the intention of taking political power by organizing the religious masses against liberals. “Democracy,” he insisted, “must be Christian, or it must not be.” He was arrested after the FATTI DI MAGGIO of 1898, sentenced to three years in jail, and released in 1899. More radical than conservative, Albertario expressed and inspired the views of the most doctrinaire and intransigent Catholics who saw no redeeming virtues in liberal ideology. His strategy of organizing Catholics to take over the state paid off in the long run with the rise of Christian Democracy (see DC), but Albertario did not live to see its success and Christian Democrats have seldom acknowledged him as a precursor.

Albertario, Davide (1846–1902) radical Catholic activist and journalist Born in the province of Pavia to a family of wellto-do landowners, Albertario first studied in seminaries where his conservative parents hoped he would be shielded from liberal influences, then

Alberti, Leon Battista (1404–1472) Renaissance scholar, scientist, and architect Alberti is often cited as the best example of the many-talented Renaissance man, or uomo universale, broadly knowledgeable, conversant with

Albertini, Luigi 103

many disciplines and arts. Alberti’s interests covered literature, the visual arts, engineering, music, and mathematics. He was born in GENOA, the illegitimate son of a wealthy Florentine merchant in political exile from his city. In Venice, where he followed his father and spent his youth, Alberti studied classical Greek, Latin, mathematics, the liberal arts, church law, and practiced a variety of sports. At age 24 he obtained a degree in law. Like FILIPPO BRUNELLESCHI, he studied ancient ruins in Rome, and his writings on the subject spread the cult of classical design. In 1430 he was allowed to take holy orders in spite of his illegitimate birth, which normally would have excluded him from the religious life. In Florence, where he settled in 1534, he emerged as a theorist of a new approach to the visual arts, education, and family life. Most influential were his treatises De pittura (On painting, 1436), De statua (Of sculpture, ca. 1464), and the all-important De re aedeficatoria (On building), which he wrote over a period of many years and was published after his death. The treatise on building was based on his close study of Roman ruins, carried on in Rome after Pope Nicholas V (1447–55) had called on him to study and plan the reconstruction of the city. Particularly noteworthy is Alberti’s concept of church architecture, examples of which are the façade of Santa Maria Novella in Florence, of Sant’Andrea in Mantua, and the Tempio Malatestiano in the church of San Francesco in Rimini. Alberti argued that advances in technology and engineering enabled his contemporaries to replicate the achievements of the ancients in building and the visual arts. He urged painters and sculptors to study anatomy so that they could render nature and the human form more realistically. It was also proper for art, he argued, to expand its themes beyond the religious, to include mythology, nature, and history. His contributions extended to philosophy and religious studies. As a member of the Florentine Academy (see ACADEMIES), he was instrumental in the effort to reconcile Plato’s philosophy with the Christian faith.

Albertini, Luigi (1871–1941) journalist, political commentator, and public figure A leading figure of Italian JOURNALISM, Albertini was born in Ancona to a wealthy business family that experienced hard times in the early 1890s after the bankruptcy and death of the father. He graduated from the University of Turin and taught political economy, sharing the economic liberalism of his friend LUIGI EINAUDI. A stint as an apprentice journalist in London in 1894–95 convinced him that Italian journalism should rise above political partisanship and adopt the model of factual reporting exemplified by the London Times. After working as an economic journalist in Rome, in 1898 Albertini was hired by Milan’s Corriere della Sera. As manager, Albertini modernized the printing facilities, launched the popular illustrated Sunday supplement La Domenica del Corriere, and introduced a special book review section. In 1900 he became the Corriere’s chief editor, making it the most authoritative and respected paper in the country. Interpreting political independence as freedom from government control, Albertini was a severe critic of Prime Minister GIOVANNI GIOLITTI, whose policies he regarded as corrupt and corrupting. Constitutional government, patriotism, legality, administrative honesty, and economic liberalism were values that Albertini regarded as nonpolitical. The paper attracted the most prestigious names of Italian journalism, including GIOVANNI AMENDOLA, LUIGI BARZINI SR., and GIUSEPPE ANTONIO BORGESE. GABRIELE D’ANNUNZIO and LUIGI PIRANDELLO contributed to the paper’s terza pagina (third page), which covered art and literature. Albertini’s political sympathies were with conservative liberals like ANTONIO SALANDRA and SIDNEY SONNINO. He supported the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR, opposed broadening the suffrage, resented clerical meddling in politics, and favored Italian intervention in WORLD WAR I. He was made a senator in 1914. After the war, he represented Italy at the Washington Naval Conference (1921). Initially tolerant of FASCISM as a remedy against communism, he opposed it after it came to power, and condemned

104 Aldrovandi, Ulisse

its political use of violence against opponents. In 1922 he turned down Mussolini’s offer to serve as ambassador to Washington. Political pressure evicted him and his brother Alberto from the leadership of the Corriere in November 1925. Albertini then turned to agriculture, with a land reclamation project in the Roman countryside that he financed and supervised. He moved to Rome in 1926 and devoted the last years of his life to research and writing.

Aldrovandi, Ulisse (1522–1605) scientist, collector, and classifier of natural objects Aldrovandi, a celebrated naturalist from Bologna, devoted his professional life to collecting, describing, and classifying natural objects. His collection of familiar and exotic animals, fossils, stones, gems, and metals formed a private museum that he called a “theater of nature.” Visitors from all over Europe came to study, exchange ideas, and satisfy their intellectual curiosity. Aldrovandi’s goal was to promote the understanding of nature, demystify its processes, discover recurring patterns in natural phenomena, and ultimately write a definitive history of the natural world. He saw himself as carrying on the work of Aristotle by testing and verifying the factual observations of the ancient master using logic and independent empirical investigation. The concept of assembling and ordering natural objects in a single space in the museum had a lasting impact on the methodology of learning. Aldrovandi’s museum was a social space devoted to communal investigation and cooperative scholarly discourse, radically different from the private libraries prevalent at the time as places of study for isolated individuals. Aldrovandi was not only a scientist, but also an effective publicist of the new methodology based on the importance of empirical observation and the accumulation of facts. His fame and influence endured in part because the city of Bologna maintained his collection for several decades after his death. His many admirers and students

saw to the posthumous publication of his voluminous writings, tables, and illustrations.

Aleardi, Aleardo (1812–1878) poet and patriot dear to the romantic imagination A most popular poet in his own time, Aleardi’s literary reputation has suffered greatly since his death. Born to a noble family of Verona, baptized Gaetano Maria Aleardi, he studied law at the University of Padua, where he showed far greater enthusiasm for the rowdier aspects of student life than for scholarship. His most notable interests were poetry, country, and women, not necessarily in that order. Although love of women was a recurring theme of his poetry, he never married, but in Il matrimonio (1842), one of his early poems, he did acknowledge the importance of marriage. Sympathy for the sufferings of the poor and disinherited was a sign of his generosity. Politically, he was decisively democratic. He sided with the Venetian revolutionaries in 1848. In 1852 and 1859 he was arrested and jailed for his political views. Noble but not wealthy, he pursued the writer’s life in the face of deprivation. His first popular poem was Lettere a Maria (1846), which expressed platonic love for an unidentified woman. Aleardi’s verse, unlike his actions, exalted pure, platonic love, and mystical connections with women, nature, and the life of the spirit. He appealed to the romantic imagination of his time. After national unification Aleardi was honored as a poet and patriot. His Canto politico (1862) called for liberating ROME from papal rule. His appointment as senator in 1873 recognized him as one of the country’s leading public figures. He lived the last years of his life in Florence, where he also taught at the Fine Arts Institute. Critics had begun to question his literary merits well before his death, chastising his verse as sentimental and mannered. The criticism was too harsh. An unprejudiced reader often senses genuine sentiments behind the overly refined language. Rejecting the Arcadian

Alfieri, Vittorio 105

poetry of the 18th century as frivolous, Aleardi wanted art to confront real issues and express real sentiments. In that sense, he was an authentic figure of the romantic age.

Aleramo, Sibilla See FACCIO, RINA. Alexander VI (1431–1503) pope (1492–1503) Born near Valencia (Spain) to a noble Catalan family and baptized Rodrigo de Borja y Borja, he was known in Italy as Rodrigo Borgia. In 1456 Rodrigo received a degree in canon law from the University of Bologna. That same year an uncle became Pope Callistus III (1455–58), made the nephew a cardinal, and appointed him to several lucrative ecclesiastical posts. A skillful politician and able administrator, Rodrigo became an influential member of the Roman curia, engineering the election of several popes before arranging his own election in 1492. His success was made possible by the support of influential families, most notably the ruling SFORZA FAMILY of Milan. A handsome man of vigorous physique, the new pope was known to be a womanizer (he had at least four illegitimate children) and to appoint family members to lucrative public posts (nepotism). But he also used family members to advance his own policies, as he did by arranging marriages of his daughter Lucrezia Borgia. None too popular in Rome where he was resented as a foreigner, he had to contend with an organized opposition that lost no opportunity to portray him in the most unfavorable light. Indeed, it is easy to see him as the personification of the lust, simony, and nepotism that critics have attributed to RENAISSANCE popes. While his personal failings are undeniable, recent studies have also drawn attention to his considerable achievements. Elected pope, he sought reconciliation with his opponents and worked to create a united front of Italian rulers to prevent a French invasion of the peninsula. His efforts failed, the French took Rome in December 1494,

and Alexander had little choice but to get along with the dominant new power. He seconded the efforts of his son, Cesare Borgia, to enlarge the PAPAL STATES at the expense of neighboring MILAN and VENICE. Alexander’s most formidable critic and opponent within the church was GIROLAMO SAVONAROLA, whom he excommunicated in 1497 and pressured the Florentine state to proceed against. Alexander then made some feeble efforts at church reform that can be seen as anticipating the more successful efforts of his successors. Looking beyond Europe, Alexander encouraged Spanish expansion in the nonChristian world. A papal bull of 1493 fixed the line of demarcation between the overseas possession of Portugal and Spain in such a way that the entire American continent was within the Spanish sphere. But the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) altered the line so as to put the territory later known as Brazil under Portuguese rule. Alexander died while apparently trying to engineer his own succession to the papal throne. His behavior as pope reflected and magnified the faults of his age, but he must also be numbered among those Renaissance popes who sought to restore power and dignity to the papacy by giving it a viable territorial basis and role in world affairs, and by patronizing the arts.

Alfa Romeo See FIAT. Alfieri, Vittorio (1749–1803) writer and patriotic figure Recognized as a forerunner in the search for a modern Italian identity, Alfieri was born to a noble Piedmontese family from Asti. His pursuit of literary fame took him far from his family and region culturally and emotionally. While he admired the aristocracy’s ethic of honor, he came to despise that class and Piedmontese society generally for being provincial and antiintellectual. In his writings, Alfieri protested against all forms of servility and conformism dictated by society. Nevertheless, he remained too

106 Alfonso I of Naples

much the aristocrat to be truly democratic, and his contempt extended to the conformism of the crowd, whose tyranny he feared as much as he feared and resented the tyranny of monarchs. He came to these views after a restless life that began predictably enough for a member of his class with years of study at the Royal Academy of Turin (later the Military Academy), from which he graduated in 1762. He served as an officer in the Piedmontese army until 1774, traveling to other parts of Italy and Europe, and everywhere enjoying access to the most select circles thanks to his family background. Travel opened his mind to the ideas of the ENLIGHTENMENT. Back in Italy, Alfieri resolved to devote himself to a life of writing, making Italian the language of choice. In his writings, which included plays based on the stories about Cleopatra, Antigone, Agamemnon, Brutus, and Orestes, Alfieri looked back to ancient Greece and Rome. Civic virtue and heroic individualism were the two themes that he celebrated in his writings. In Della tirannide (Of tyranny, 1777), he praised ancient Romans for their spirit of republican pride and independence, and castigated his contemporaries for their servility. In Del principe e delle lettere (Of the prince and letters, 1778–86), he urged writers to keep their distance from the powerful, maintain their independence, and speak out uncompromisingly for liberty. His love and open relationship with the countess of Albany, wife of the Stuart pretender to the English throne, was both a deeply felt passion and an assertion of independence from social conventions. Initially an admirer of the American and French revolutions, Alfieri turned against the FRENCH REVOLUTION for its mob violence and cult of equality. His antagonism toward everything French deepened after the French invasion of Italy in 1796. The virulence of his feelings finds full expression in the verses of the anti-French diatribe Il misogallo (1793–99). In the account of his life that he gave in Vita (1790–1803), Alfieri saw himself as struggling to perfect his art, find his own voice, and be an example to his contemporaries. The notion that writers have an obligation to confront real issues

through their art and inspire virtue in others is a legacy that Alfieri passed on to his successors.

Alfonso I of Naples (1396–1458) king of Naples (1443–1458) The son of Ferdinand I of Aragon and Sicily, he inherited the crowns of Aragon and Sicily from his father in 1416, ruling over these lands as Alfonso V. He acquired the crown of Naples in 1443, after more than 20 years of costly and bloody wars against rival claimants to the throne. The one constant of his tortuous diplomacy was to consolidate Aragonese control of the western Mediterranean. In 1420 he invaded the island of Sardinia, which provided him with a convenient base of operations against the Italian mainland. In 1421 Queen Giovanna II of Naples (1414–35) asked for his help against French claimants to her throne. Giovanna’s adoption of Alfonso provided the basis for his claim to her throne upon her death, a claim that he successfully defended against the French. Alfonso devoted himself entirely to Italian affairs after taking up residence in Naples in 1443 and left his Spanish possessions under the care of his wife and brother. His expansionist inclinations embroiled him in unsuccessful wars for control of Milan (1447–53). After hesitating, he signed the Peace of Lodi (1454) that brought a measure of political stability to Italy. He increased the power of the crown at the expense of the already weakened feudal nobility of the kingdom. Styling himself Rex Sicilie citra et ultra farum (King of Sicily on both sides of the lighthouse), a reference to a lighthouse that guided ships through the Strait of Messina, he concentrated power in the royal household, with limited autonomy granted to local councils and parliaments of the nobility. The concentration of power in royal appointees was not without benefits: banditry was virtually eliminated, the arbitrary powers of local officials curbed, corruption of public officials reduced, and laws made more uniform. Government revenue increased substantially with the introduction of direct taxes, which weighed disproportionately on the poorer

Alps 107

erary critic, Algarotti urged writers to write in their own native language to express authentic cultural values. After returning to Italy in 1753, Algarotti founded a school in Bologna, promoted the publication of his own writings, and carried on a busy correspondence with his many acquaintances in Italy and the rest of Europe. Algarotti was an effective publicist for the culture of the Enlightenment in Italy, for Italy’s contributions to that culture, and for the use of Italian as the language of the educated.

classes. Much was spent on the army, consisting of Italians, Spaniards, and mercenaries, and on the navy, which Alfonso used to extend Neapolitan power to the eastern Mediterranean. Under Alfonso’s leadership, Naples reached the height of its power and influence in Italy and the Mediterranean region. That power was based on the close relationship that he maintained with Spain, but the relationship tilted heavily in Spain’s favor after Alfonso’s death. Alfonso, called the Magnanimous because of his generous patronage of the arts, turned his court into a major center of humanistic culture. He himself was well educated, versed in philosophical studies, an eloquent speaker, affable and patient when it suited him. He was also exceedingly jealous of his royal prerogatives and was a determined state-builder, according to the most progressive notions of royal power at the time. Admired and praised by the artists and writers whom he patronized, he was resented by many of his Neapolitan subjects, especially by the nobility whose privileges he attacked, for his autocratic ways and for the preferential treatment of Spaniards at his court.

SOCIAL MOVEMENT).

Algarotti, Francesco (1712–1764)

Alps

writer, literary critic, and publicist for the new science Algarotti was born in Venice to a wealthy merchant family, studied in Venice, Rome, and Bologna, was drawn to the study of science, and wrote the treatise Newtonanismo per le dame (Newtonism for the ladies, 1737), which in spite of its frivolous title was really a serious interpretation of Newtonian science as a continuation of the work of GALILEO. The book brought Algarotti instant celebrity. His travels took him to many European countries, including France, England, Prussia, and Russia, everywhere received as an honored guest. In 1746 he was appointed court chamberlain to Frederick II of Prussia, whom he served until 1753. He was Voltaire’s friend and correspondent. His writings, covering a broad range of topics, treat all the major issues of his time with elegance and wit. As a linguist and lit-

The great mountain range of the Alps that arches over northern Italy in an east-west direction separates Italy from France, Switzerland, Austria, and Slovenia. The territory known as the Italian Alps covers the western, southern, and eastern slopes. In the west, where the Alps separate Italy from France and sweep northward from the Riviera across the region of Piedmont, the range is no more than 60 miles deep, but contains the highest peaks. The tallest of all, Mont Blanc, is in French territory close to where the borders of Italy, France, and Switzerland meet. It is part of a massif that reaches an elevation of 15,571 feet (4,807 meters). Long ridges and deep valleys descend from the flanks of the Alps toward the Po Valley, carrying rivers and streams that irrigate the fertile plains of the region of LOMBARDY. In the central part of the Alps, the Brenner Pass facilitates communications between Italy

Alitalia Airline See IRI. Alleanza Nazionale See MSI (ITALIAN SOCIAL MOVEMENT).

Allies See WORLD WAR II. Almirante, Giorgio See MSI (ITALIAN

108 Alto Adige

and Austria. The Brenner border, following the high peaks of the Alps in this central portion, was attained by Italy at the end of WORLD WAR I, a conflict that Italy fought almost entirely in the difficult territory of the central and eastern Alps. The eastern Alps bordering on Slovenia are not as clearly demarcated as the other portions of the chain. They are characterized by lower summits of no more than 8,500 feet and mountain passes that invite population movements. Italian and Slavic-speaking populations have mixed freely in the course of centuries, generally without producing the kind of ethnic conflicts frequent in other parts of the region. Although the Alps present a formidable obstacle on paper, they have never prevented military incursions into Italy. From the time when Hannibal carried out his legendary crossing with elephants in the third century B.C. to the French invasions of the 15th century, or the German takeover in WORLD WAR II, the Alps have been a porous border. The economy of the Alps has been traditionally agricultural, characterized by small family plots that do not encourage the use of modern methods of production. Sizable family farms survive in the region of TRENTINO–ALTO ADIGE where German-speaking populations hold on to their traditional custom of passing farms intact from one generation to the next. But in the Italian-speaking areas, where the practice of divisible inheritance prevails, land ownership is extremely fragmented. In recent years, cooperative ventures, especially in pasturage and wine production, have ameliorated the situation. Historically, the population had recourse to emigration. In the past the incidence of emigration from Alpine territories, particularly in the region of VENETIA, has at times been higher than from Italy’s impoverished South. Significant manufacturing activities have developed in some towns at the foot of the Alps, such as Como, Lecco, and Varese. Today, tourism is the major resource of the Alpine economy. Spectacular scenery, lakes, summer retreats, and superb skiing facilities attract visitors from all over the world.

Alto Adige See TRENTINO–ALTO ADIGE. Alvaro, Corrado (1895–1956) writer inspired by the traditions and folklore of the Italian South This noted journalist and fiction writer was born in Reggio Calabria to a lower-middle-class family (his father was an elementary school teacher), studied in Naples and Rome, served as an infantry officer in WORLD WAR I, and earned a degree in letters from the University of Milan in 1920. Although his experiences carried him away from his native CALABRIA, most of his writings are inspired by the folklore, customs, and mentality of his native region. Politically liberal and a dissenter from FASCISM, he avoided overt criticism of the regime and stayed in Italy. But his novels and short stories can be read as warnings against the dangers that totalitarian governments, both Fascist and communist, pose to culture. His message was that intellectuals should maintain their independence from all political creeds. His fame was secured by the publication in 1930 of a collection of short stories entitled Gente in Aspromonte and of the novel Vent’anni (Twenty years). Gente in Aspromonte, his most widely read work, tells the story of a family of hardworking shepherds who wreak revenge against an oppressive landlord and are driven to break the law by their elemental thirst for justice. Because a strong southern perspective animates all of Alvaro’s writings, he is credited with drawing public attention to the seriousness of the SOUTHERN QUESTION in the postwar years.

Amadeus Ferdinand Maria of Savoy (1845–1890) (Amedeo Ferdinando Maria di Savoia) duke of Aosta, member of the Italian ruling dynasty, and king of Spain Amadeus, second son of VICTOR EMMANUEL II, accepted the crown of Spain in 1870 after it had been left vacant by the forced resignation of Queen Isabella in 1868. His candidacy was put

Amato, Giuliano 109

forth with the approval of other European powers partly to forestall a German claim to the throne, to thwart the establishment of a republic in Spain, and satisfy the dynastic ambitions of his father. Powerful conservative interests opposed his candidacy, including the Carlists, who found him too liberal and objected to the anticlerical policies of the HOUSE OF SAVOY. Amadeus accepted the Spanish crown reluctantly. After escaping several attempts on his life and threatened by rebellion, Amadeus resigned as king of Spain in 1873 and returned to Italy. His candidacy has been seen as part of a policy of Italian expansion, but it seems that Foreign Minister EMILIO VISCONTI-VENOSTA yielded out of concern that a refusal would lead to the establishment of a Spanish republic.

bic and began research on the period of Muslim rule in Sicily, and made contact with GIUSEPPE MAZZINI, the champion of Italian independence. He welcomed the revolution of 1848, was elected to the Sicilian parliament, and served as finance minister in the revolutionary government. He returned to Paris as a political exile in 1849, eventually distancing himself from the more radical patriots and becoming a lukewarm supporter of CAVOUR’s moderate policies. He completed his study of Muslim rule in Sicily with the publication of his Storia dei musulmani in Sicilia (History of the Muslims in Sicily, 1854–72), which was hailed as a major contribution to the study of the Muslim expansion. He was appointed senator in 1861 and served as minister of education (1862–64). He retired from teaching in 1866 and devoted the rest of his life to his scholarly pursuits.

Amari, Michele (1806–1889) Sicilian scholar, patriot, and foremost orientalist of his generation Amari was born in Palermo to a middle-class family of lawyers and civil servants. His admiration for English and French Enlightenment authors, developed when he was a student at the University of Palermo, made him politically suspect in the repressive atmosphere of the KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES. Amari had decidedly democratic tendencies, resented aristocratic privileges, and opposed Neapolitan rule over his island. When his father was arrested in 1822 for conspiring against the government, Amari assumed financial responsibility for his family as a civil servant. His efforts to contain the cholera epidemic of 1837 took on a coloring of political opposition. He resented his transfer to Naples in 1838, returned to Sicily in 1840, and in 1842 completed his first major work, La Guerra del Vespro siciliano (History of the War of the Sicilian Vespers), which was the first attempt at a historical reconstruction of the popular revolt of 1282 against the French. Amari’s account stressed the popular character of the uprising and downplayed the role of the aristocracy. Amari then went to Paris, where he studied Ara-

Amato, Giuliano (born 1939) former socialist, prime minister Born in Turin, Amato joined the Italian Socialist Party (PSI) at age 20. He was elected to parliament in 1983, served as deputy prime minister in the government headed by Bettino Craxi (1983–87), was treasury minister in 1987, and prime minister from June 1992 to April 1993. As prime minister, Amato pursued a policy of tight spending with considerable success, and led a crackdown against organized crime and government corruption. His deft handling of policy matters earned him the sobriquet, Doctor Subtle. He is also known as Topolino (Mickey Mouse) because of his small stature and decisive manner. Amato maintained personal credibility in the upheavals of the early 1990s because he was not personally implicated in the political scandals that ruined the Socialist Party and ended the political career of his former mentor Craxi. He served as minister for constitutional reform and again as treasury minister under MASSIMO D’ALEMA. Amato returned to the prime ministry as an independent in April 2000 following the resignation of D’Alema. His second coalition

110 Ambrosio, Vittorio

government took the country into the EUROPEAN Unabashedly intellectual, Amato was thought to lack the charisma to compete successfully in the general elections of May 2001. Rome’s photogenic former mayor Francesco Rutelli headed the Olive Tree coalition in his place, losing to SILVIO BERLUSCONI, who succeeded Amato as prime minister in June 2001. UNION.

Ambrosio, Vittorio (1879–1958) army general and chief of staff General Ambrosio was born in Turin and began his military career as a cavalry officer. He fought in the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR, in WORLD WAR I, and continued to serve in the 1920s as an army commander in Sicily. In WORLD WAR II he commanded an army in Yugoslavia in 1941 and was appointed army chief of staff in January 1942. Ambrosio developed a reputation for political tact in difficult situations and for being able to defuse professional rivalries. By 1943 he was convinced that Italy could not win the war and sought to convince BENITO MUSSOLINI that Italy should break away from Germany and conclude a separate peace. In February 1943 he replaced UGO CAVALLERO as general chief of staff in charge of all military services and began to plan the withdrawal of Italian troops from abroad. In early July, after concluding that Mussolini would not break away from Germany, Ambrosio began secret preparations to transfer military power from Mussolini to the king. He was instrumental in carrying out the coup of July 25, 1943, that removed Mussolini from power. Keeping his post after the coup, Ambrosio played a role in the secret armistice negotiations with the Allies. He is held partly responsible for the state of confusion that led to the complete collapse of the army when the armistice was announced on September 8, 1943. He stepped down as general chief of staff in July 1944, retired from the army, and lived quietly after the war, never commenting on his role in the controversial events of 1943.

Amendola, Giorgio (1907–1980) anti-Fascist activist and Communist Party leader Giorgio Amendola, the son of GIOVANNI AMENDOLA, carried on his father’s battle against fascism from a position further to the left. Born in Rome, he joined the Italian Communist Party (PCI) in 1929. Arrested in 1932 for seditious activities against the regime, he spent the next five years in jail. As an expatriate in France in the late 1930s, he took charge of party activities in that country. He escaped to Tunisia during the German occupation of France, returned to Italy in 1943, participated in the RESISTANCE, and was a member of the Rome Committee of National Liberation. In April 1945 he organized the takeover of the city of Turin by the resistance prior to the arrival of the Allies. He served in parliament as a member of the Communist Party in all the postwar legislatures and was a member of the party’s central committee from 1955. He carved out a position for himself as an expert on economic issues and on the SOUTHERN QUESTION, and led the fight for internal democracy within the party. He took a strong stand against TERRORISM, favored closer ties to Western Europe, and was elected to the European parliament in 1979. In 1975 he initiated the national debate with historian RENZO DE FELICE on the historical role of the resistance and the relationship between fascism and the Italian republic. Amendola pursued the course set for the Communist Party by PALMIRO TOGLIATTI, pursuing power by electoral means, organizing workers and intellectuals, and reaching out to the middle classes. The policy of gradual penetration of government and society was reformist, but Amendola and other members of what was called the right wing of the Communist Party saw it as the only practical way to restructure Italian society in an egalitarian direction. Amendola’s hope of creating a unified, democratic party of the left committed to fundamental change came to fruition 10 years after his death with the founding of the Democratic Party of the Left.

anarchism 111

Amendola, Giovanni (1882–1926) political journalist, member of parliament, and anti-Fascist activist This Neapolitan journalist, remembered for the brave opposition to fascism that cost him his life, actually started out on the fringes of the political right as a nationalist collaborator of GIOVANNI PAPINI and other young radicals opposed to the liberalism of GIOVANNI GIOLITTI. He served in WORLD WAR I, and in 1916 joined the staff of the Milanese daily Corriere della Sera. He parted company with the nationalists after the war by advocating a policy of friendship and collaboration with the new state of Yugoslavia. He ran for parliament successfully in 1919, 1921, and 1924 as a radical democrat close to FRANCESCO SAVERIO NITTI. By this time he could be described as a liberal who believed in political diversity and parliamentary government, but feared the consequences of universal suffrage and proportional representation. Full democracy might give too much power to voters unprepared to use it responsibly and play into the hands of demagogues on the political left and right. In 1922 he served as minister of colonies in the government headed by LUIGI FACTA. He was not an immediate opponent of fascism, hoping that drawing Fascists into the government and giving them a share of power would educate them politically. He did oppose the march on Rome and turned resolutely against fascism in 1923 when it became clear the Fascists were out to seize full control of government. He coined the term “totalitarian” to describe the nature of fascism and waged a courageous war against the emerging regime from the pages of his newspaper Il Mondo (1922–26). He led the constitutional opposition in parliament and the AVENTINE SECESSION after the murder of GIACOMO MATTEOTTI in June 1924. As leader of the opposition he urged the king to remove BENITO MUSSOLINI from power, and sought to mobilize public opinion against the emerging regime. He left the country for France after suffering a savage beating at the hands of Fascist thugs in 1925 and died a year later from the aftereffects of the beating.

Amicizia Cristiana See SECRET SOCIETIES. anarchism social theory and movement that sees the power of the state as the main impediment to a just society The anarchist movement developed in Italy largely at the initiative of the Russian agitator MICHAEL BAKUNIN, who was present in Italy from 1864 to 1874. Initially an emissary of Karl Marx, Bakunin set off the anarchist movement when he decided to strike out on his own. Convinced that Italy was ripe for social revolution, he looked to the impoverished peasantry of the South to start the revolution. To make headway, anarchism had to battle the rival influences of Karl Marx and GIUSEPPE MAZZINI. The rivalry intensified in 1871 in the wake of the repression of the Paris Commune. Anarchism had some appeal for intellectuals and workers. Italian anarchists maintained loose ties with Marx’s International Workingmen’s Association until expelled in 1896. CARLO CAFIERO and ERRICO MALATESTA inspired and steered the movement. The anarchist creed, fundamentally antiauthoritarian, was also atheistic and favored government decentralization, local autonomy, and small-scale economic organization. It called for individual, revolutionary, violent action (“propaganda of the deed”) to set off larger conflagrations. Self-proclaimed anarchists practiced political assassination and other forms of terrorism. Sante Caserio (1873–94), a baker, assassinated the president of France in 1894. Luigi Luccheni (1873–1910) assassinated Empress Elizabeth of Austria in 1898. Gaetano Bresci (1869–1901), a textile worker, assassinated King UMBERTO I in 1900. The fact that Caserio and Luccheni were Italians working abroad points to the appeal of anarchism among politically conscious Italian emigrants. Sizable colonies of Italian anarchists existed in Marseilles; New York City; Paterson, New Jersey; and Barre, Vermont. Anarchism lost much of its appeal in Italy after

112 Andrea del Sarto

the dismal failure of anarchist-led uprisings. ANDREA COSTA openly disavowed the tactics of violence and insurrection in favor of the reformist, electoral politics of socialism after the last unsuccessful anarchist uprising in southern Italy in 1877 (Moti del matese, uprising of the matese—a rugged mountain region northeast of Naples). Anarchism remained a presence in Italy until the Fascist regime suppressed it entirely. Traces of anarchist mentality linger on in the antiauthoritarianism of libertarians and radicals who distrust the power of government.

craftsmanship and expressiveness evident in Andrea del Sarto’s paintings caught the imagination of later generations. Robert Browning imagined him as an artist driven by a relentless creative urge, unappreciated by those close to him, particularly by his wife, who was portrayed as the bane of his artistic life. That can all be ascribed to poetic license. Andrea del Sarto’s work suggests an artist highly disciplined, given to understatement, isolated, and prone to go his own way.

Andreotti, Giulio (1919– Andrea del Sarto (1486–1531) Renaissance painter Overshadowed and influenced by his older contemporaries LEONARDO and RAPHAEL, the Florentine painter Andrea del Sarto is often consigned to the second rank of RENAISSANCE artists. He stands out for his adherence to the principles of classical representation at a time when artists were beginning to strive for the dramatic visual effects that culminated in MANNERISM. Andrea del Sarto’s paintings are characterized by balanced composition, clarity of line, delicate colors, and the use of chiaroscuro. The overall effect is one of gentle expressiveness and quiet melancholy. A good example of his style of painting is the altarpiece of the Madonna of the Harpies (1517), a representation of the Virgin and Child, on display in the Uffizi Gallery in Florence. A later painting, The Lamentation (1524), done after Andrea had left Florence with his family to escape an outbreak of the plague, shows figures grieving over the body of the dead Christ (Andrea’s wife, Lucrezia del Fede, posed for the figure of the Virgin). It stresses the redeeming message of Christ’s sacrifice rather than his sufferings, reflecting perhaps the piety beginning to permeate Florentine popular culture at the onset of the CATHOLIC REFORMATION. While not a mannerist, Andrea del Sarto’s meticulous craftsmanship influenced mannerist artists of a later generation, including GIORGIO VASARI, who deemed his works faultless. The combination of

)

prime minister and Christian Democratic leader Born into a Roman family of modest means, he studied law at the University of Rome. A devout Roman Catholic, from his student days he gravitated toward Catholic organizations and formed close ties with religious and lay figures destined to play an important role in his rapid rise to power and prominence. These included the future pope, PAUL VI, and the Christian Democratic leaders ALCIDE DE GASPERI, and ALDO MORO. Elected to parliament in 1947, Andreotti has occupied important posts as minister of finance, treasury, defense, industry and commerce, and budget. He was prime minister three times, in 1972–73, 1976–79, and 1989–92. An adroit and devious politician, he has played a major role in Italian politics whether in or out of power. He has been the architect of political alliances and coalition governments that aimed at keeping the Communists out of power and Italy firmly anchored in the Western camp during the years of the cold war. In the United States he was regarded as a key ally. He was nevertheless instrumental in shaping the so-called Historic Compromise of 1976 that should have led to formal communist participation in government. He was prime minister during the years of extreme unrest and political terrorism that saw the kidnapping and murder of Aldo Moro by the RED BRIGADES in 1979. He was again prime minister when the end of the cold war doomed the polit-

anticlericalism 113

ical system that sustained his power. His lengthy political presence, pursuit of controversial policies, wily methods, and involvement in murky political deals aroused suspicion and hostility. His political career was terminated in 1993 when prosecutors charged him with conspiring with and protecting the MAFIA. In 1999 a jury acquitted him of the serious charge that he had conspired in the 1979 murder of muckraking journalist Carmine Pecorelli. Andreotti was acquitted of all charges in October 2003 by the country’s highest court (corte di cassazione) after a 10-year ordeal. He remains a highly controversial figure who speaks out on public issues and calls himself the victim of political vendettas and betrayal by enemies and former friends. He is also a prolific, witty, and often entertaining writer of light and serious works.

ments, producing enough heavy artillery without government authorization to meet the military emergency after the BATTLE OF CAPORETTO. At war’s end, Ansaldo was the country’s largest industrial complex. In 1920, under the aggressive management of the brothers Mario and Pio Perrone, it attempted to gain control of the Banca Commerciale Italiana (see BANKING) to secure urgently needed capital. When the takeover failed, Ansaldo was rescued from bankruptcy by the government in 1922, setting a precedent for later public rescues of private firms. The company was kept alive in the 1920s by the government’s program of naval expansion. It was eventually absorbed by IRI in 1932, ceasing its operations as a private firm and becoming part of the public sector of the economy.

Anselmi, Tina See PROPAGANDA 2. Annali Universali di Statistica See SCIENCE.

anticlericalism Ansaldo Company This manufacturer of steel, ships, locomotives, rolling stock, and armaments was founded in 1852 by Giovanni Ansaldo (1819–63), a Genoese entrepreneur who started out as an architect (one of his projects was the design for Genoa’s monumental cemetery at Staglieno) and as a teacher of mathematics. He went into business in the 1850s at the urging of Count CAVOUR, the Piedmontese prime minister who wanted to encourage industrialization. Ansaldo started out manufacturing locomotives, railroad and naval equipment, diversifying after national unification into the production of steel and armaments. In 1903 the company was reorganized into a joint-stock operation with the help of British capital, undergoing a major expansion in the next 10 years. When WORLD WAR I broke out, Ansaldo supported Italian intervention on the side of the Entente powers. The firm experienced unprecedented growth during the war as the country’s major manufacturer of arma-

Resentment and opposition to the secular influence and political power of the CATHOLIC CHURCH has been a feature of Italian life for centuries. It was present in the writings of NICCOLÒ MACHIAVELLI, the culture of the ENLIGHTENMENT, FREEMASONRY, and in the politics during and after the RISORGIMENTO. The church’s opposition to national unification and to the Italian state fueled and exacerbated feelings of anticlericalism, particularly among educated Italians. Efforts by the Italian state to guarantee papal sovereignty and compensate the church for its economic losses did not lessen the conflict between CHURCH AND STATE. Anticlerical feelings were shared by most 19th-century patriots. They were particularly strong among members of the LIBERAL LEFT that won control of parliament in 1876. In the 1880s and 1890s Prime Minister Francesco Crispi was determined to wage a fight to the finish against supporters of the pope, who were referred to disparagingly as papalini (little papists). The government openly encouraged antipapal activities, and clashes between clericals and anti-

114 Anti-Comintern Pact

clericals often turned violent. National associations like the Società del Libero Pensiero (Society for Free Thought), founded in 1872, and the even more militant Giordano Bruno Society, dominated by Freemasons, organized anticlerical demonstrations and disseminated anticlerical literature. The government dissolved many Catholic organizations after the FATTI DI MAGGIO of 1898. Government-sponsored anticlerical measures abated in the first decade of the century as Prime Minister GIOVANNI GIOLITTI sought the political support of Catholics. Many Fascists shared anticlerical sentiments, but anticlericalism found little government support under FASCISM, once the regime had come to terms with the church. After WORLD WAR II, anticlericalism was a significant source of popular support for the parties of the political left, especially the Communist Party (PCI). Communist anticlericalism diminished in the 1970s when the party sought an accommodation with the church in its bid to share power with the dominant Christian Democratic Party (DC). The election in 1978 of Pope JOHN PAUL II, the first non-Italian pope in almost 500 years, had the probably unintended consequence of reducing papal interference in Italian politics, thereby defusing the political resentments that fueled anticlericalism. Political anticlericalism seems to be on its way to extinction. It is perhaps being replaced by indifference to religion, as suggested in declining rates of church attendance and to the church’s teachings on controversial issues like ABORTION and DIVORCE.

Anti-Comintern Pact The Anti-Comintern Pact was initially an anticommunist understanding between Germany and Japan concluded in November 1936. Italy joined the pact in November 1937. Italian interest in reaching an understanding with Germany and Japan predated its adherence to the pact. The Italian aim was to reach an anti-British alliance with Japan in the wake of the ETHIOPIAN WAR, hoping that it would distract British attention from the Mediterranean. Since the Japanese

were unwilling to antagonize the British at that moment, the Italian government settled for a three-way understanding directed against the Soviet Union that aimed at containing communism. Thus, the Italian government responded favorably to German solicitations to join the pact. Even without specific provisions for its implementation, the pact signaled the ideological and diplomatic alignment of the three powers, leading the way to the TRIPARTITE PACT and the alliance of the three powers in WORLD WAR II.

antifascism Anti-Fascist movements and ideas originated from different political directions and for different reasons. Slow to develop because most observers did not believe at first that BENITO MUSSOLINI intended to enact far-reaching constitutional changes, anti-Fascist initiatives gained momentum after 1924 when it became clear that the government was out to crush all opposition. Most political parties and observers misread Fascist intentions during the first two years of Fascist rule. Liberals and Catholics thought that fascism was an unpleasant but necessary antidote to the rising influence of socialists and communists who had scored impressive gains in the elections of 1919 and 1921. Even socialists and communists, who were the frequent targets of Fascist attacks, did not seem unduly alarmed. To them, fascism was merely a more naked version of capitalist reaction, different in form but not in substance from the reaction of liberal governments. Anti-Fascist movements developed when it became clear that the Fascists were set on changing the political ground rules. The Catholic leader, LUIGI STURZO, was one of the first to sound the alarm, joined quickly by the moderate socialist leader FILIPPO TURATI and the liberal maverick, GIOVANNI AMENDOLA. Others who were critical of fascism were reluctant to speak out as long as Fascists confined their assaults to members of the far left. It was the assassination of GIACOMO MATTEOTTI that galvanized and united the opponents of fascism. In the AVENTINE SECESSION, parliamen-

Antonelli, Giacomo 115

tary opponents tried to oust Mussolini by boycotting parliament. Their failure, and the repressive laws enacted by the Fascist government in 1925–26, signaled the beginning of a new phase in the fight against fascism. Without freedom of expression, opponents of the regime could no longer come together openly. The special laws legalized political persecution, drove the opposition underground, or forced it to leave the country. Official police figures show that by 1929 5,046 suspected subversives, most of them communists, were referred to the special tribunal set up to weed out political opponents. Of these, 901 were condemned to serve prison terms, and an undetermined number were subjected to forced confinement or police surveillance. By the early 1930s domestic opposition to fascism had ceased to exist for all practical purposes. With the exception of a few isolated communist cells that managed to survive underground until 1932, and Catholic dissenters who found cover in religious organizations or the Vatican, resistance continued from abroad. France, Switzerland, Belgium, England, the United States, and the Soviet Union were the major countries where anti-Fascist expatriates found refuge. In 1927 liberals, republicans, and socialists founded the Anti-Fascist Concentration in Paris to help political refugees and work for the restoration of political freedoms in Italy. The leader of the concentration was the socialist elder statesman Filippo Turati. Other prominent socialists held important positions. The movement Giustizia e Libertà, launched in 1929 by CARLO ROSSELLI, appealed to non-communists, distanced itself from existing parties, and promised a democratic republic after the fall of fascism. That the Fascist regime would fall seemed most unlikely in the early 1930s. Not only was the regime secure at home, but Hitler’s rise to power in January 1933 promised to facilitate the spread of fascism abroad. That prospect, and the threat that it posed to communism and the Soviet Union, convinced communists to make common cause with other anti-Fascists in so-called Popular Front movements and governments. One such leftist governing coalition in

Spain triggered the military reaction led by General Francisco Franco. In the ensuing Spanish civil war (1936–39), Germany and Italy supported Franco militarily, while anti-Fascist volunteers, about 5,000 of them Italians organized in the Garibaldi Brigade commanded by RANDOLFO PACCIARDI, rallied in defense of the Popular Front government. For these and other anti-Fascist fighters, the Spanish civil war was a dress rehearsal for what they hoped would be a decisive military showdown in Italy. They had to wait for Italy’s defeat in WORLD WAR II for that showdown to happen. A complete military defeat was required to topple the regime. Political divisions and personal rivalries prevented anti-Fascists from forming a united front until Mussolini was ousted from power by a palace coup in July 1943. Although anti-Fascists had no role in Mussolini’s ouster, they did play an important role in the RESISTANCE movement that followed. At that point, the history of antifascism becomes part of the struggle to liberate Italy from fascism and from German control. The unity of political forces of the resistance in their common fight against fascism made antifascism the sustaining ideology of the Italian republic founded in 1946.

anti-Semitism See JEWS IN ITALY. Antologia (L’) See JOURNALISM. Antonelli, Giacomo (1806–1876) cardinal and Vatican diplomat Giacomo Antonelli, chief adviser to Pope PIUS IX, was born near the town of Terracina, in the Papal States, to a prosperous merchant family. He attended the seminary and university in Rome, earned a doctorate in canon and civil law, and entered the papal civil service in 1830. His intelligence and competence opened the way to steady advancement; in 1844 he was appointed papal treasurer and was made a cardinal in 1847.

116 Antonioni, Michelangelo

Antonelli supported political reforms during the first years of Pius IX’s pontificate, but changed course when reform gave way to revolution in 1848. Thereafter, second in command in the Vatican as secretary of state and chief adviser to the pope, he was a hard-line defender of traditional papal prerogatives and power. He opposed the movement for Italian unification because it threatened the pope’s temporal power. When Italy was unified in spite of papal opposition, Antonelli effectively seconded the pope’s campaign against the Italian state, making the conflict of CHURCH AND STATE the central issue of papal policy. Antonelli’s many critics saw him as the real power behind the papal throne, and he was disparaged and vilified like no other figure in the clerical camp, not only by political opponents, but also by papal supporters bent on saving the pope’s reputation as a man of reason and compromise. The debate still goes on, but the evidence suggests that Antonelli was the scapegoat for the pope’s unpopular or controversial decisions.

Antonioni, Michelangelo (1912– ) film director, cultural interpreter, and commentator Antonioni was born to a middle-class family. He studied economics and business at the University of Bologna, filmmaking in Rome, was a newspaper film critic in the 1930s, and wrote for the screen in the early 1940s. His first film was Gente del Po (1943), conceived in the realist style of social commentary. His career developed after the war with films that were controversial for their extreme realism. I vinti (Losers, 1952) was banned in Italy and France for its graphic descriptions of criminal life. Antonioni gradually developed a distinctive style marked by an obsessive preoccupation with the inner life of his characters, who were often uprooted, restless individuals suffering from the depersonalization and anomie of contemporary life. L’avventura (The adventure, 1960), L’eclisse (The eclipse, 1962), and Deserto rosso (Red desert, 1964) show Anto-

nioni’s filmmaking in its most introverted mode. His choice of subjects and cinematic technique, which seems episodic and disjointed, has puzzled critics, but his films have generally done well at the box office. He has been most admired in Anglo-Saxon countries, particularly the United States, where his descriptions of contemporary life have struck a chord. His first English-language film, Blow-Up (1966), confirmed his standing as a major cultural figure. He has also done a number of documentaries. Failing health in the 1980s forced him to cut back and abandon several projects. His most important contribution has been as a witness to the travails of a generation caught in the flux of rapid cultural change.

Aosta See VALLE D’AOSTA. Apennines The Apennine mountain range stretches over 300 miles from the Ligurian ALPS to the Strait of Messina, forming the backbone of the Italian peninsula. The chain reemerges across the strait on the island of SICILY, completing an arc that marks the eastern edge of the TYRRHENIAN SEA. The highest peak of the Gran Sasso in the region of ABRUZZO rises to 9,558 feet (2,914 meters) above sea level. While the range is not notable for high altitudes, the terrain is frequently steep and unstable. The narrow mountain backbone running the length of the peninsula impedes the formation of large rivers below the Po Valley. Of the rivers originating in the Apennines, only the Arno and Tiber have a steady if markedly uneven water flow all year. Most of the other rivers behave like raging torrents in the rainy season, only to all but dry up in the summer months. Difficulties of transportation attributable to the Apennine landscape have been largely overcome by extensive road building, tunneling, and bridge construction, at which Italians have excelled out of necessity. The Apennine range shows different characteristics in different parts of the peninsula. The

architecture 117

northern and central parts from LIGURIA through the Abruzzi are generally more forested than the southern portions, with oak, beeches, chestnuts, and conifers covering the slopes up to about 4,500 feet above sea level. Above that zone lie plateaus called alpi, which serve as grazing grounds. The practice of transhumance, whereby in the fall shepherds migrate with their flocks from these high plateaus to the lowlands and return to the higher elevations in the spring, was common until the 1950s. It is now practiced on a much smaller scale. Apennine agriculture has undergone a similar decline due to intensive depopulation. The cultivation of cereals and chestnuts needed for local sustenance has been replaced in part by the introduction of commercial crops. Olives, grapevines, and flowers are cultivated at elevations below 2,000 feet. The southern Apennines suffer from extensive deforestation, lower levels of precipitation, clayish soils, erosion, sparse vegetation, and an exceedingly complex topography marked by a maze of valleys. The Sila Mountains of CALABRIA are an exception to this generally bleak picture. There, extensive forests and wet grazing lands provide a favorable environment for pasturage, lumbering, charcoal production, and other related activities. Catering to tourists and vacationers is becoming the principal resource for many areas of the Apennines, particularly where natural attractions like thermal waters, skiing slopes, and fishing are available. Government programs of reforestation, the designation of national park areas, and enforcement of measures to protect the environment now make many parts of the Apennines attractive for hunting, fishing, skiing, hiking, camping, and other recreational activities.

Apofasimeni See SECRET SOCIETIES. Apulia See PUGLIA. Aquinas, Thomas See SCHOLASTICISM.

Arcadian Movement See ACADEMIES. architecture Every architectural period from the prehistoric to the contemporary, and the building styles of all populations that have had contacts with the peninsula, including Greeks, Arabs, Byzantines, Normans, and Germans, are represented in the architectural legacy of the Italian peninsula. Given such variety and diversity, all generalizations are questionable. But it is possible to simplify the picture by concentrating on the styles associated with periods of exceptional creativity. The classical style of ancient Rome, the Romanesque style of the medieval period, the neoclassical revival of the RENAISSANCE, the BAROQUE of the 17th and 18th centuries, the experimental architecture of the early 20th century, and the contemporary style mark such moments. None, however, were purely national; models and techniques of varying provenance influenced all. The Roman style of construction was inspired by classical Greek forms, which the Romans could see firsthand in those parts of southern Italy previously settled by Greek-speaking populations, and which can still be admired in the temples of Agrigento and Paestum. Roman architecture differed from Greek in making use of the arch and vaulting (possibly of Etruscan origin), and in the monumental scale of many of its projects. The Roman Colosseum, by far the best-known example of the Roman style, illustrates the scale of Roman construction and its use of columns and arches for both decorative and structural purposes. The golden age of Roman architecture coincides approximately with the first two centuries of the Christian era. The expansion of the Roman Empire during that period required the planning of new towns, the construction of roads and bridges, aqueducts, public baths, triumphal arches for victorious generals, popular housing for the growing urban multitudes, palaces and villas for the wealthy. Marble replaced brick as the material of choice for public buildings and the more opulent pri-

118 architecture

Interior of the Colosseum, Rome, ca. 1909 (Library of Congress)

vate residences. Architecture was the craft that glorified and preserved the empire. In the medieval period, the decline of the empire and rise of the PAPACY saw a shift toward ecclesiastical architecture. Early Christian churches replicated the form of Roman basilicas with their straight naves. This style soon incorporated Byzantine features, most notably domes, decorative frescoes, and mosaics. The period from about 1000 to 1250 saw the emergence of the Romanesque style in the building of churches, cathedrals, and monasteries. Its characteristics are massive walls needed to bear the heavy weight of vaulted roofs, emphasizing horizontal lines rather than height, with a separate bell tower (campanile) and baptistery, small windows, and the heavy use of exterior decorative sculptural details. A good example of Romanesque architecture is the cathedral complex at the Piazza dei Miracoli in Pisa, which includes the famous Leaning Tower. While there are many examples in Italy of the Gothic style (most notably in the Cathedral of Milan, begun in the 14th and completed in the 19th century), Gothic remained the style of northern Europe, influencing Italian architecture indirectly and sporadically.

The Renaissance style of architecture for which Italy is known is best seen in the works of FILIPPO BRUNELLESCHI, dating from the early part of the 15th century. The inspiration came from the study of ancient Greek and Roman structures. Large vaults and domes cover vast spaces, symmetry and balance inform the layout, and a feeling of light pervades the interior, in stark contrast with the impression of darkness and mystery typical of both the Romanesque and Gothic styles. Florentine churches, particularly the cathedral designed by Brunelleschi, afford some of the best examples of Renaissance ecclesiastical architecture. Palaces and villas built for the wealthy reflect similar concerns with symmetry and light, with concessions made to the needs of security at a time when city life could be extremely turbulent. Thus, Renaissance residences, like the Palazzo Venezia in Rome and the Pitti Palace in Florence, show few and small openings on the lower floors to facilitate defense, while the exteriors have a plain or rustic look. Ground-floor quarters were often spacious warehouses and shops to store or display the goods of the buildings’ merchant owners. Country villas, on the other hand, reflected the desire of the wealthy to enjoy the pleasures of life in grand settings rem-

ARCI 119

iniscent of ancient Greece and Rome. ANDREA villas in the Venetian countryside exemplify the craving for both comforts and dignified repose in a carefully controlled bucolic setting. Civic architecture also flourished in the Renaissance, as city governments often competed with ecclesiastical authorities to erect buildings that proclaimed the secular power of the state. The Palazzo Pubblico and the Piazza del Campo in Siena, built at the end of the 13th century, attest to the passion for public life that surged through the late-medieval and Renaissance city. Architecture in the baroque period reflected the resurgence of religious and spiritual values of the late Renaissance and the CATHOLIC REFORMATION. The baroque style was classical in concept, but characterized by the dynamic use of curves, columns, and ornamentation to create dramatic contrasts and vistas. With the decline of the baroque at the end of the 18th century, Italian architecture entered an imitative phase. But impressive examples of private and public architecture, town planning, and use of new materials and techniques of production abound in 19th-century Italy. A good example of 19thcentury public architecture is the covered Vittorio Emanuele Gallery in Milan, designed by Giuseppe Mengoni (1829–77) but inspired by London’s Crystal Palace. In Italy the Art Nouveau style popular in northern Europe at the end of the 19th century was dubbed stile floreale and stile Liberty. An example of stile Liberty is the grandiose monument to VICTOR EMMANUEL II built in Rome and inaugurated in 1911 to mark the 50th year of national unification. Dubbed the Wedding Cake by its many disparagers, and the Altare della Patria by those who revere it as a symbol, this enormous white-marble structure features a profusion of columns, staircases, and ascending levels. In reaction to the rhetorical strivings or affectations of the stile Liberty, FUTURISM proclaimed the functional mission of the arts, including architecture, in a world dominated by the machine and the factory. Futurist architecture envisioned industrial cities transformed and embellished by PALLADIO’s

rationally designed housing, places of work, and public spaces, as in the daring designs of Antonio Sant’Elia (1880–1916), featuring skyscrapers connected by bridges, intricate public transportation systems, and apartment buildings rising to dizzying heights. Functionality and rhetoric coexisted and competed for official approval and endorsement under FASCISM. The Santa Maria Novella train station in Florence (built 1933–36) is a good example of the functional style. The coeval central railway station in Milan is more traditional in its striving for monumentality. The more or less official architect of the Fascist regime was Marcello Piacentini (1881–1960), who stood out for his ability to reconcile traditional and modern schools of thought, and who ultimately came out on the side of individual inspiration. A more creative phase of Italian architecture developed after 1950. Although many of its practitioners were formed in the years before WORLD WAR II, they made their mark during the period of postwar reconstruction when architectural vision and skill were needed to help repair the damages of war. The principle of functionality still prevailed, but it was joined to concern for good craftsmanship, attractive design, and original use of quality materials. Reinforced concrete was used liberally and creatively to achieve daringly projecting surfaces, span valleys with sleek viaducts for modern highways, build new housing, sports complexes, and other public spaces catering to multitudes of people. The most notable figure of this most recent phase is Pier Luigi Nervi (1891–1979), who prided himself on being the kind of architect who understood the practical aspects of construction. His works, like the Palazzetto dello Sport in Rome and the George Washington Bridge Bus Terminal in New York, combine efficiency, economy of line, and an impression of airiness and lightness in a harmonious whole.

ARCI (Associazione Ricreativa Culturale Italiana) See GAY MOVEMENT; OPERA NAZIONALE DOPOLAVORO; SPORTS.

120 Ardigò, Roberto

Ardigò, Roberto (1828–1920) philosopher and teacher, leading thinker of Italian positivism Born near Cremona, this influential philosopher was the acknowledged leader of philosophical POSITIVISM in Italy. Ordained a priest in 1851, he left the priesthood in 1871 after a protracted polemic with his clerical superiors who wanted him to renounce certain publicly stated views on matters of faith that were deemed incompatible with Catholic belief. Ardigò taught philosophy at the secondary level before his writings won him a regular appointment as professor of philosophy at the University of Padua in 1881. His writings on the importance of science and the scientific method appealed at a time when the country was trying to catch up with scientific advances elsewhere in Europe. Perhaps his most influential work was La morale dei positivisti (The positivist morality, 1879), in which he argued that reason must be cultivated to conquer instinct and foster the common good. Ardigò followed Herbert Spencer in placing natural evolution at the center of his philosophical system, but insisted on the autonomous development of his thought from the naturalistic premises of RENAISSANCE philosophy. According to Ardigò, nature evolves gradually from a state of inchoate confusion toward specific forms. From a shapeless beginning, the world assumes an infinite variety of forms, both material and spiritual, all of which stem from the original matter. The mind, being a product of this process, is capable of understanding reality in all its aspects through the senses. There is no problem that reason cannot solve given time and resources. Although a strong believer in science and evolution, Ardigò rejected purely materialistic notions that reduced consciousness and mental activity to mere chemical and biological processes. Rejecting absolute material determinism, he argued that mind and matter have evolved as distinct and equally important entities. His philosophy appealed to movements of the democratic left, particularly turn-of-the-century RADICALISM, that looked for a progressive philosophy of social action, believed in individual

choice, and rejected the strict materialism and historical determinism of the Marxist left.

Arditi These highly trained and motivated shock troops were founded and saw action in WORLD WAR I. They were meant to attack enemy lines, engage in hand-to-hand combat, and open the way for massive attacks by regular infantry troops. Recruited from ultranationalists, adventurous youths, and jailed criminals, battalions of Arditi were deployed after the disastrous BATTLE OF CAPORETTO and played an important role in halting the Austro-German advance in northern Italy. They also participated in the final battles of the war that saw the collapse of the Austrian army. About 10,000 Arditi joined the political association Arditi d’Italia, founded in November 1918, which called on war veterans to take a political stand. The politicization of the corps and the Arditi’s frequent breaches of military discipline alarmed the government, which disbanded their military formations in January 1919. Arditi veterans played a prominent role in the seizure of the city of FIUME by GABRIELE D’ANNUNZIO in September 1919. Many former Arditi joined the Fascist squads, contributing to fascism’s tactics of violence, its cult of youth, warlike imagery, and rituals. The Fascist Militia was initially modeled on the Arditi, but was later diverted toward policing rather than purely military roles.

Aretino, Pietro (1492–1556) Renaissance writer, courtier, and public figure Scandalous behavior, irreverent, biting, and scurrilous writings did not prevent Aretino from enjoying the patronage and friendship of some of the keenest minds and most influential personages of his time, including Cardinal Giulio de’ Medici (the future pope CLEMENT VII). Many were willing to overlook Aretino’s glaring personal faults because of his wit and literary talents. He was born in Arezzo to a family of modest means (his father was a cobbler), and adopted the name

Ariosto, Ludovico 121

of his native city as his own, perhaps to disguise his humble origins. He received his first education from an uncle who was a cleric and from a local nobleman who was the lover of Aretino’s attractive mother. He left Arezzo at age 18 to live the life of an itinerant intellectual. Between 1510 and 1527, he lived in PERUGIA, SIENA, ROME, and MANTUA, everywhere enjoying the support of wealthy and influential patrons, who glossed over his misbehavior and protected him from his many enemies. In Perugia he wrote his first poems, but it was in Rome that he gained a reputation as a writer of unmatched wit, evident in the public lampoons of prominent figures, known as pasquinate, into which Aretino poured all his venomous talent. His older contemporary LUDOVICO ARIOSTO rightly called him the Scourge of Princes. Aretino had to leave Rome in 1525, after barely surviving an attempt on his life. He found refuge in Venice where he lived from 1527 to the end of his life, showing his gratitude by calling that city the fatherland of all lovers of liberty. In Venice he fell in love with a woman whom he credited with converting him to the love of women, had several illegitimate children with various mistresses, but also continued to carry on the homosexual affairs that had made him notorious. His reputation as a writer and satirist rests on his lampoons, letters, sonnets, dialogues, and plays, but that reputation was for a long time clouded by his obsessive interest in and depiction of sexual matters. A famous portrait by TITIAN shows a portly Aretino proudly displaying the necklace that was a prized gift from the king of France.

Ariosto, Ludovico (1474–1533) (or Lodovico) inspiring literary figure and indifferent public servant Born in Reggio Emilia to a family of the nobility, Ariosto was raised and educated in FERRARA, where he entered into the service of the ruling ESTE FAMILY. Although his desire to devote himself to literature was thwarted by family respon-

Ludovico Ariosto (Library of Congress)

sibilities and by his obligations of diplomatic service to the Estes, Ariosto managed nevertheless to write profusely. Latin poetry and plays written in the vernacular poured from his pen, the latter being performed in the court theater at Ferrara, where he also served as theatrical director. His masterpiece is the epic poem Orlando furioso (1532), which he intended as a sequel to the unfinished poem by Matteo Boiardo (1441–94), the Orlando innamorato. Ariosto’s poem flattered his patrons by introducing the ancestors of the Este family in the heroic tales that he recounted. The opening verse of “I sing of ladies, knights, weapons, and loves” introduces the tale of the medieval knight Orlando (Italian for Roland, the knight of Carolingian epic), who is hopelessly in love with Princess Angelica (hence the adjective furioso, as madly in love), and is driven by his

122 aristocracy

passion to spectacular feats of heroism. Duels, sieges, and shipwrecks see Orlando and fellow fighters pitted in deadly struggle against infidel Muslims, who are eventually defeated by the Christian warriors. Ariosto’s account of this traditional material shows nostalgia for the waning world of medieval chivalry. But, along with affection for the past, there is also an ironic detachment from the ethos of knightly culture that was being challenged by new forms of statecraft and warfare. When Ariosto wrote his poem, Europe was girding itself to confront the twin threats of Muslim expansion and religious wars unleashed by the Protestant Reformation. It was an open question whether the wealthy bourgeois class that was replacing the old titled nobility would be up to the task. The poem thus touched a raw nerve with its idealization of the past and tacit acknowledgment of a crisis of values in the Christian world. Ariosto’s poem reflects concerns similar to those evident in Miguel de Cervantes’s Don Quixote. The immediate popularity of Orlando furioso was due as much to the nature of the message as to the lyrical beauty of Ariosto’s verses. The poem is an enduring classic of Italian literature.

aristocracy This least studied of social classes has played a prominent role in every economic, social, and political development of the last 500 years. The term covers a variety of groups and figures at the top of the social ladder, some distinguished by titles of nobility (counts, barons, dukes, princes), others recognized as an elite by virtue of their lineage, wealth, and historical role. Titles of nobility are of royal origin, bestowed by monarchs as rewards for service, often but not exclusively for service of a military nature. Popes also bestowed titles of nobility in their capacity as temporal rulers, giving rise to what later would be called the “black aristocracy” of Rome. Titles were more than marks of distinction, as they often entailed special privileges of dress and precedence and economically valuable conces-

sions, such as immunities from taxation and the right to collect fees for the administration of justice. The old republics of VENICE, GENOA, and LUCCA did not bestow titles of nobility, but were nevertheless governed by aristocracies (patriciates) that enjoyed special rights in government and public life. LOMBARDY and TUSCANY also had aristocracies that lacked formal titles of nobility, but that were recognized nevertheless as privileged orders. The MEDICI are perhaps the best example of an aristocratic family that rose to be de facto rulers of a state without special titles of nobility, until receiving them in the 16th century by imperial concession. Historians tend to look upon the aristocracy as a class in decline since the 18th century, but recent studies point to its ability to adjust and profit from historical changes. There are indeed many examples of aristocratic families and individuals who have been economic innovators, provided bureaucrats and officers for modern states and armies, espoused progressive political ideals, and even supported revolutions. The Piedmontese aristocracy is often cited as an example in this regard, Count CAMILLO BENSO OF CAVOUR being its best example of a modernizing, politically progressive aristocrat. The aristocracies of other Italian states were also important players in movements for reform, as attested by such names as BELGIOIOSO, CARACCIOLO, CONFALONIERI, PALLAVICINO, and RICASOLI, to name a few prominent aristocrats active in progressive causes. The novel by the Sicilian nobleman Giuseppe di Lampedusa, The Leopard (1960), is a classic account of the aristocracy’s talent for accommodation and survival.

Arlacchi, Pino (1951–

)

sociologist and international authority on organized crime A sociology professor at the University of Florence, Arlacchi has studied and written extensively on the MAFIA and international crime. In 1997 he resigned from the Italian senate to devote himself full time to his duties as director

armed forces 123

of the United Nations’ Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention. In the United Nations, he is responsible for directing the international campaign against drug traffic and the illegal transportation of people for purposes of exploitative employment and prostitution. According to his estimates, in the 1990s the traffic in human beings has involved more than 30 million people from Southeast Asia alone. His studies emphasize the businesslike nature of organized crime and its need for government collusion and protection to carry on its activities. His writings include The Mafia Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1986).

armed forces Four services make up Italy’s armed forces: army, navy, air force, and the self-contained corps of the carabinieri, which serves as a national police force in peacetime and as military police in wartime. The armed forces of the unified state were formed by amalgamating three distinct entities: the Piedmontese army that played a major role in the movement for national unification, the paramilitary forces composed of volunteers at the command of GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI, also an important component of the unification movement, and the armies of pre-unification states that had opposed national unification. The most important by far among the last was the army of the KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES. The amalgamation of these forces created friction, as the Piedmontese insisted on imposing their military organization and practices on this heterogeneously composed national army. Soldiers were required to swear loyalty to King VICTOR EMMANUEL II, who was the nominal commander in chief. The army was based on long terms of service of four to five years on active duty and six in the reserve, with conscripts chosen by lot. To compensate for deficiencies of training and equipment, the army relied on elite troops like the Bersaglieri, mobile troops trained for rapid action present in the old Piedmontese army since 1836. The first challenge faced by the army was the repression of BRIGANDAGE in the South, for which

some 100,000 troops were mobilized and deployed in a brutal civil war. Internal policing would always be an important duty of the army, making it the object of popular resentment. On the other hand, the army was expected to endear itself to the people, to make them proud of being Italian, instilling in them a sense of discipline and collective mission, taking on educational responsibilities, like teaching conscripts how to read and write. Financial support for the army varied from a high of around 40 percent of state expenditures in the 1860s to around 20 percent in later years. Naval expenditures increased greatly in the 1880s when the government committed itself to a program of naval expansion that was designed to turn Italy into a world-class naval and colonial power. The army’s performance against Austria in the Third WAR OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE (1866) exposed serious deficiencies of preparation and command, prompting a general reorganization by General Cesare Ricotti Magnani (1822–1917) from 1870 to 1876. The term of regular service was reduced to three years, the peacetime strength of the army was set at 224,000, expandable to 800,000 by calling up the reserves, and specialized mountain troops, the Alpini, were deployed to defend the northern border. This military organization remained essentially unchanged until WORLD WAR I. Although military expenditures were high in relation to total government spending, they were inadequate to maintain an efficient army and navy of the size contemplated. The ITALIANTURKISH WAR (1911–12), in which airplanes were first used in combat, drained military resources, leaving the country ill prepared to face WORLD WAR I. By 1914, when European powers were using costly armaments and engaged in naval races, Italy’s finances were strained to the utmost to maintain an army of 750,000 and a navy that ranked fifth in the world in tonnage, behind Great Britain, Germany, the United States, and France, but ahead of Austria-Hungary and Russia. That the country’s armed forces were too large for its economic resources is also evident from the fact that Italy was the power that spent

124 armed forces

the least on the individual soldier, a mere $67 a year (in 1914 dollars), compared with $1,000 for the United States, $352 for Great Britain, $148 for France, and $136 for Germany. World War I posed the most severe challenge ever faced by the Italian armed forces. Five million men were mobilized, the dead numbered close to 600,000, the disabled 1.7 million. Demobilization proceeded rapidly once the war was over, but little effort was made to reorganize the military. Proposals made by General Antonino Di Giorgio (1867–1932), who served as war minister in 1924–25, to reduce the size of the peacetime army and spend more on training and equipment ran into opposition from fellow officers. In 1925 General PIETRO BADOGLIO became the chief of staff, a position that he retained until 1940. With fascism in power, and BENITO MUSSOLINI eager to play a personal role in military matters, the army closed ranks around Badoglio, whose loyalty to the Fascist regime was more a matter of convenience than conviction. It relegated the Fascist Militia, which aspired to become a full-fledged military force, to a secondary paramilitary role as an internal police force. Army and navy officers remained loyal to the king, refused to join the party, and resisted efforts at “fascistization.” The one exception was the air force, which became an independent branch of the military in 1925 on a footing of parity with the army and navy, and was considered to be the most Fascist branch of the armed forces. In the 1930s infantry divisions were reduced from three to two regiments to give them greater mobility in what military experts expected to be the “wars of rapid decision” of the future. While Italian military doctrine envisaged highly mobile forces of great firepower, military training and equipment reflected the mentality of trench warfare typical of World War I. The outbreak of WORLD WAR II in September 1939 found Italy seriously unprepared for the conflict. Mussolini’s decision to go to war in June 1940 was based on the erroneous estimate that a German victory was imminent. The military command acquiesced in what they saw as a political deci-

sion that they should not question. When the German war machine stalled and the prospects of rapid victory evaporated, the Italian military faced a long war for which neither the armed forces nor the country as a whole were prepared. Serious deficiencies in armored weaponry, heavy artillery, antiaircraft defense, air power, and poor coordination among the three services hampered performance, with often disastrous results. Defeat brought dramatic changes to the Italian armed forces. With the monarchy gone, the army lost much of its political clout, and the loss of colonies deprived the military of a claim to a large share of the nation’s resources. Postwar governments renounced the great-power ambitions of Fascist and pre-Fascist foreign policy and settled for a cautious course in international relations that left little scope for military action. The PEACE TREATY imposed severe limits on the size of the army, navy, and air force. The new CONSTITUTION renounced war as an instrument of international relations and gave command of the armed forces to the figurehead president. The ministry of war was renamed the ministry of defense. Military spending has been a low priority since World War II, generally running well below 2 percent of the gross domestic product. The armed forces have adjusted to their reduced role, not without pain or resentment, and not without arousing suspicion of harboring designs to undermine or bring down democratic government. But as a rule the armed forces have acknowledged the authority and legitimacy of civilian control. Military conscription remains in force, with short 10-month periods of service and with provisions for performing alternative social service. In recent years the armed forces have come under severe public scrutiny for their antiquated facilities, harsh treatment of recruits, and inadequate support services. A reform is underway that aims to make the armed forces more professional, with long-term recruitment, improvement of training methods, and modernization of equipment. The Italian armed forces are fully integrated within NATO and have participated in

Austrian Empire 125

various international actions, including interventions in Lebanon (1982), Somalia (1992), Croatia (1996), Kosovo (1999), and ALBANIA. The end of the cold war and the shifting of tensions toward the Middle East and the Mediterranean area have changed the international landscape and Italy’s strategic position. The change is bound to affect the future role of its armed forces domestically and internationally even as public opinion remains deeply suspicious and averse to military commitments—witness the strong public resistance to government support of the recent (2003) war in Iraq. The government of SILVIO BERLUSCONI has committed 3,000 troops to police duty in postwar Iraq in spite of domestic opposition to the deployment.

Armed Revolutionary Nuclei See ORDINE NUOVO.

ited with creating the very concept of an Italian national cuisine. Italy was still a country of regions when the book was published 30 years after national unification. By the very fact of presenting in one book recipes from different parts of the peninsula, describing cooking methods easily followed in ordinary kitchens, discussing the variety of ingredients and ways of blending them into tasty and unpretentious dishes, stressing the importance of freshness, sound cooking techniques, and simple but attractive presentations, and deploring the tendency of chefs to slavishly follow French cuisine, he established the style of cooking that would be known as Italian. His book was an immediate success, went through many editions both plain and lavish, and sold millions of copies. Artusi did for Italians at table what CAVOUR, GARIBALDI, and MAZZINI did for Italians in politics: He gave them a common frame of reference that became part of their national identity. The Art of Eating Well (1996), a recent translation, makes Artusi’s classic accessible in English.

Artusi, Pellegrino (1820–1911) author credited with inventing the idea of a national Italian cuisine The fact that Artusi was born in Forlimpopoli, a town in the ROMAGNA region renowned for its cuisine, may indeed be the key to his fame. Born to a merchant family, Artusi developed a good sense for business, which served him well as a silk merchant, investor, and banker. By age 50 he had achieved sufficient financial security to retire from business and pursue his true interests, which consisted of conversing, socializing, and eating well. As he explained in the book that made him famous, La scienza in cucina e l’arte di mangiar bene (The science of cooking and the art of eating well, 1891), the principal needs of the human race are nutrition and reproduction. While he had little to say about the latter, at least in print, he was a veritable fount of wisdom when it came to eating. The book gave advice on good hygienic habits in the kitchen, the nutritive value of foods, how to make the best use of ingredients, proper deportment at table and, most of all, it presented a profusion of recipes that is cred-

Aspromonte, Battle of See GARIBALDI, GIUSEPPE.

Astrolabio (L’) See ROSSI, ERNESTO. Austerlitz, Battle of See NAPOLEON I. Austrian Empire Territories inhabited by Italian-speaking populations were an integral part of the Austrian Empire throughout its entire history. The proximity of the Tyrol, TRENTINO–ALTO ADIGE in Italian, a hereditary possession of the ruling HABSBURG DYNASTY since the 14th century, oriented the territorial and political ambitions of the Habsburgs toward Italy. Habsburg influence in Italy became dominant in the wake of the WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION with the incorporation of LOMBARDY into a vast multinational empire extending from

126 Austrian Succession, War of the

eastern Europe to the Low Countries. The Austrian position in Italy was further strengthened by the accession of the HABSBURG-LORRAINE DYNASTY to the Tuscan throne in 1737. In 1797 the Habsburgs annexed Venetia by the terms of the Treaty of Campoformio concluded with NAPOLEON. French domination replaced Austria’s during the Napoleonic period, but the Austrians returned in force after Napoleon’s decisive defeat in 1814–15. Lombardy and Venetia became once again lands of the Austrian Empire as an autonomous “Lombardo-Venetian Kingdom” headed by an Austrian viceroy. Austrian princes ruled in TUSCANY, PARMA, and MODENA, while the governments of the PAPAL STATES and the KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES relied on the support of Austrian arms. After 1815 Austria was the ultimate guarantor of a peace settlement that was based on keeping the peninsula politically divided. As such, the Austrian Empire was the most formidable enemy of Italian political unification. Austrian rule survived the REVOLUTIONS of 1848–49, but suffered a fatal setback after being defeated by France and the Kingdom of SARDINIA in the Second WAR OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE (1859). That defeat led to the unification of Italy in 1860–61. Austria held on to VENETIA until 1866, when it was forced to cede that region as part of the peace settlement following the Third War of National Independence. Austria retained control of other Italian-speaking territories in the Trentino and around the port city of TRIESTE until the end of WORLD WAR I. The nature of Austrian rule in Italy is still the subject of historical controversy. Patriotic Italian scholarship has traditionally emphasized the oppressive character of Austrian rule, pointing out that Austria levied more in taxes in its Italian possessions than it spent there, that Italians were discriminated against in public service, and that Austrian rule rested ultimately on the use of violence and military repression. Dissenting voices have pointed out that Austrian administration was more efficient and honest than the administration provided by native governments, its taxation fairer, and its economic policies more

progressive. The debate appears to have been stoked by recent developments. Northern SEPARATISM and membership in the EUROPEAN UNION once again raise questions about the strength of ties among Italian regions and the country’s relationship to the rest of Europe, questions that were once discussed in the context of Italy’s role in the Austrian Empire.

Austrian Succession, War of the The war broke out in 1740 after the accession of MARIA THERESA of Austria after the death of her father, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles VI (1711–40). Austria was attacked by a combination of powers eager to seize Habsburg territories. The anti-Austrian coalition included Prussia, France, Spain, Bavaria, Poland, and Saxony, while Austria was supported by England and Russia. The war was fought in Central Europe, France, the Low Countries, and Italy. In Italy, the king of Sardinia, Charles Emmanuel III (1730–73), first joined the anti-Austrian coalition, but switched sides in 1742 after being promised part of Lombardy. His army rendered a signal service to Maria Theresa by protecting Austria’s southern flank against the French and Spaniards, but in the end Charles Emmanuel had to be content with merely rounding out his Piedmontese territories to the historical boundary of the Ticino River, leaving the greater prize of Lombardy in Austrian hands. In the south, King CHARLES OF BOURBON sided with Spain, and consolidated his rule by defeating an Austrian army at the Battle of Velletri (1744). The Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748), which ended the war, acknowledged Piedmontese gains and the independence of Naples, and awarded the duchy of PARMA to the Bourbon ruler, Philip, son of ELISABETTA FARNESE. The settlement left the Italian peninsula under the control of foreign powers. Austria was the dominant power, but Spain maintained a foothold with Bourbon rulers installed in Naples and Parma. Italian patriots would later complain that the peace settlement turned Italy into a vast tourist playground at the mercy of foreign masters. Nev-

Aventine Secession 127

ertheless, Austrian hegemony gave the peninsula nearly 50 years of political stability, until the Napoleonic invasion of 1796. During those 50 years Italy contributed to the culture of the ENLIGHTENMENT, enjoyed close ties with the rest of Europe, and experienced economic and political reforms that set the stage for further progress in the 19th century.

autarky pursuit of national economic self-sufficiency proclaimed autarky as official policy in March 1936, but the pursuit of national economic self-sufficiency had been underway since the mid-1920s when the Fascist regime had launched campaigns to expand production of wheat and enacted protectionist measures to shield domestic manufacturers from foreign competition. The official adoption of autarky was a result of the ETHIOPIAN WAR and the economic sanctions against Italy adopted by the League of Nations. National economic self-sufficiency was presented as a necessary precondition for the conduct of an independent foreign policy and preparation for future military conflicts. But full economic self-sufficiency was unattainable by Italy given its almost total dependence on imported fuels and key raw materials. The country did achieve self-sufficiency in grain production by 1938, and domestic substitutes were developed to compensate in part for the lack of certain raw materials. The production of artificial fibers, hydroelectric power, chemicals, shipping, armaments, and machinery was boosted by the pursuit of autarky. The regime touted these results as major achievements, while critics pointed to the high costs of substitutes and the diversion of scarce resources from potentially more profitable or useful investments. Autarky did entail costly public subsidies for production and the creation of a vast public sector of the economy (see IRI).

BENITO MUSSOLINI

Autunno caldo See LOTTA CONTINUA.

Avanguardia Socialista See LABRIOLA, ARTURO.

Avanti! See JOURNALISM. Aventine Secession parliamentary protest against the Fascist regime In June 1924, within days of the assassination of socialist leader GIACOMO MATTEOTTI by Fascist toughs, a group of about 150 anti-Fascist deputies left parliament in protest. The move, named after the plebeians of ancient Rome who had withdrawn to the Aventine Hill in protest against the power of the patricians, initiated an organized effort to bring down the government of BENITO MUSSOLINI. It was led by GIOVANNI AMENDOLA, who hoped that the protest would give King VICTOR EMMANUEL III justification to dismiss Mussolini, as it was his constitutional prerogative to do. The king’s refusal doomed the Aventine secession to failure. The gesture had major resonance in the country and left Mussolini momentarily isolated. But it also had the unintended consequence of leaving Mussolini vulnerable to the pressure of die-hard Fascists who demanded that he move ruthlessly against all political opponents. Mussolini responded by doing precisely what they, and perhaps he, wanted to do all along, calling on the Fascist squads to crack down on opponents of the regime. The Catholic, communist, republican, and socialist deputies who had bolted from parliament reclaimed their seats in the course of 1925, but emergency decrees issued by the government a year later declared them forfeited and expelled the former secessionists from the lower house of parliament. The political wisdom of the secession has been questioned because it removed the regime’s opponents from parliament and made it easier for Mussolini to enact legislation that clamped down on civil liberties and laid the foundations of his personal dictatorship. Nevertheless, the Aventine Secession was a morally significant gesture that exposed the Fascist regime’s ultimate reliance on violence.

128 Avogadro, Amedeo

Avogadro, Amedeo (1776–1856) mathematician and scientist Born in TURIN to a family of the Piedmontese nobility (he held the title of count of Quaregna), Avogadro received degrees in civil and canon law from the University of Turin in 1795 and 1796, and served in the courts during the French occupation and the RESTORATION. His passion was for the study of physics and mathematics, which he pursued first as an amateur. He was appointed to teach physics and mathematics at the University of Turin in 1814–22 and 1834–50. A theoretical physicist with little interest in experimentation, he pioneered the developing field of physical chemistry. In 1811 he formulated the hypothesis, since known as Avogadro’s Law. It states that under the same conditions of pressure and temperature, equal volumes of gases contain the same number of molecules. Using Avogadro’s Law, other physicists were able to determine that the number of molecules present in the gram molecular volume is the same for all gases, and called that number (6.02 times 10 to the 23rd power) Avogadro’s number. Modest and selfeffacing, Avogadro was a prolific writer with many publications to his credit. His scientific papers and essays, published in French and Italian, have gained him a posthumous reputation as a major contributor to the atomic theory of matter.

Axis, Rome-Berlin political alliance of Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany The Axis, as the political and military alliance between Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany is commonly known, developed in the late 1930s. As late as 1934 major differences divided the two countries over such issues as the fate of Austria (which Fascist Italy wanted to keep separate from Nazi Germany as a buffer state between the two countries), racial policies (which BENITO MUSSOLINI condemned as nonsensical until 1934), and the international Fascist movement (which both sides wanted to control). Until 1935 Hitler

showed much more interest in an alliance with Italy than Mussolini showed in an alliance with Germany. This changed in the aftermath of the ETHIOPIAN WAR, which left Italy isolated and consequently more interested in establishing closer ties with Germany. In his speech of November 1, 1936, Mussolini referred to the developing connection with Germany as “an axis around which can revolve all those European states with a will to collaboration and peace.” In Mussolini’s mind, if not in Hitler’s, considerations of political expediency weighed more heavily than the ideological affinities between the two regimes. Later, Italy joined the ANTI-COMINTERN PACT signed by Germany and Japan and concluded the PACT OF STEEL with Germany, thus transforming the informal understanding known as the Rome-Berlin Axis into a formal military alliance.

Azeglio, Luigi Taparelli d’ See CIVILTÀ CATTOLICA.

Azeglio, Massimo d’ (1798–1866) writer, painter, patriot, and political figure This Piedmontese nobleman is remembered chiefly as a patriot who espoused the cause of Italian unification under the leadership of the HOUSE OF SAVOY. He was also a painter and writer of considerable renown in his time, particularly admired for patriotic novels like his Ettore Fieramosca (1833), which stirred national pride by pointing to the military valor of Italians in earlier times. His political pamphlet Gli ultimi casi di Romagna (On recent events in Romagna, 1846) condemned both the abuses and the corruption of papal government and the extreme views of conspirators like GIUSEPPE MAZZINI. D’Azeglio thus carved out a political space in the national movement for the moderate leadership of the House of Savoy, which he served faithfully. He was wounded fighting against Austria in 1848. As prime minister to King VICTOR EMMANUEL II (1849–52) he supported constitutional government, secured parliamentary approval of the

Azione Cattolica Italiana 129

anticlerical Siccardi Laws (1850), which abolished ecclesiastical courts, limited property donations to religious bodies, and decriminalized the nonobservance of religious obligations. He resigned as prime minister in November 1852, outmaneuvered by CAVOUR. Less flexible than Cavour, d’Azeglio feared an alliance with radical patriots surrounding GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI, seeing in them the vanguard of republicanism and social chaos. He played no significant role in the events of 1859–60 that culminated in the unification of Italy. He regarded national unification with some apprehension, for fear that the South would be

a drag on the North. In the autobiographical I miei ricordi, published posthumously in 1867, d’Azeglio warned Italians of the difficulties ahead. Although the phrase, “Now that we have made Italy we must make the Italian people,” attributed to him does not appear in precisely that form in his memoirs, it does reflect his view that political unification was just the beginning of a long and difficult process of national fusion.

Azione Cattolica Italiana See CATHOLIC ACTION.

B Baccarini, Alfredo See LIBERAL LEFT. Baciocchi, Elisa Bonaparte (1779–1820) sister of Napoleon I, ruler of Lucca (1805–1809) and Tuscany (1809–1814) This younger sister of NAPOLEON I, married in 1797 to Felice Baciocchi (1762–1841), a Corsican officer whom Napoleon elevated to the rank of prince, ruled along with her husband the principalities of LUCCA and Piombino from 1805 to 1809. Elisa wielded effective power, displaying immense energy and clarity of purpose in enacting reforms in her domains. Penal and civil laws were brought into compliance with French legislation, and schools, hospitals, aqueducts, and roads were built or improved. Urban renewal changed the appearance of many parts of the city. She bowed to her brother’s will under pressure, confiscating ecclesiastical assets even though she recognized that attacking the church would render her unpopular. One privilege that was much appreciated by her subjects was the exemption from military service. Elisa was ambitious to rule beyond the two small principalities assigned to her in 1805. In 1809 she obtained from her brother the title of grand duchess of Tuscany and moved to Florence, while continuing to exercise her sovereignty over Lucca and Piombino. In Tuscany, which was then annexed to France, her powers were limited. Her popularity declined in the final years of the Napoleonic period, partly as a result of economic hardship resulting from the trade restrictions of Napoleon’s Continental System. She was forced into exile and deposed following Napoleon’s military defeats in 1814–15.

130

Badoglio, Pietro (1871–1956) chief of staff and prime minister Badoglio is a notable and controversial military figure of the period 1914–45. Piedmontese by birth, he pursued a military career with singleminded concentration, rising quickly from colonel to general during WORLD WAR I. The exploit that is associated with his name and opened his way to advancement was the capture of the important Austrian position of Monte Sabotino (August 1916), which led to the capture of the city of Gorizia. He suffered a setback a year later when the army he commanded crumbled at the BATTLE OF CAPORETTO, but his career did not suffer. In the aftermath of that disaster, he helped reorganize the army in preparation for the battle of the Piave River, which halted the last Austrian offensive in June 1918. After the war Badoglio served as army chief of staff (1919–21). For his known anti-Fascist sentiments he was consigned to the minor post of Italian ambassador to Brazil (1923–24), but BENITO MUSSOLINI called him back and appointed him to the newly created post of chief of general staff (capo di stato maggiore), which he held from May 1925 to December 1940. He was responsible for advising Mussolini on all military matters, coordinating the activities of the army, navy, and air force, and overseeing all military planning. Mussolini was ultimately responsible for military policy, but Badoglio bears much responsibility for the failure to modernize Italy’s ARMED FORCES. He failed to coordinate planning for the army, navy, and air force, did not appreciate the importance of air power, paid scant attention to motorization, mechanization, and use of heavy

Bakunin, Michael 131

armor. He remained very much a traditionalist who relied on numbers and infantry. Badoglio was at his best in organizing and conducting colonial wars. Without relinquishing his post as chief of general staff, he assumed command of the military operations that brought Libya under full Italian control (1928–33). In 1935, as tensions mounted in the Mediterranean, he warned Mussolini about the dangers of a naval conflict with Great Britain should Italy launch an invasion of Ethiopia. But once the ETHIOPIAN WAR was underway, he made clear his interest in assuming command. Mussolini obliged him by appointing him to succeed General EMILIO DE BONO in November 1935. Badoglio thus prepared and led the final offensive that broke the back of the organized resistance in May 1936. Badoglio’s lavish rewards for that feat included promotion to the rank of marshal and the title of duke of Addis Ababa. But while reaping these rewards Badoglio made his dissent from some of the regime’s policies known. He favored an alliance with France against Germany, expressed opposition to Italian intervention in the Spanish civil war and to Italian intervention in WORLD WAR II. But he was always cautious, never took an unqualified stand, and always yielded when Mussolini showed resolve. He was silent when Mussolini took Italy into war in June 1940. Badoglio was forced out as chief of staff in December 1940 after the armed forces had suffered a series of humiliating reverses. Although he was blamed for the poor military performance, the regime took no steps against him and he dropped out of the public eye. From this semiretirement, he positioned himself to succeed Mussolini as Italy’s defeat drew nearer. King VICTOR EMMANUEL III appointed him to head the new government after removing Mussolini on July 25, 1943. Badoglio then attempted the risky maneuver of negotiating a secret armistice with the Allies and changing sides in the war, while simultaneously assuring Hitler that Italy would continue to fight as Germany’s ally. The gambit failed, Badoglio abandoned Rome to the Ger-

mans, fled to the South with the royal court to seek protection from the Allies, and left the armed forces without orders. Those decisions destroyed the armed forces and assured the collapse of the monarchy after the war. But Badoglio was not done yet. As head of two successive governments operating under strict Allied control, he made Italy a “cobelligerent” in the war against Germany (October 1943) and oversaw the army’s limited role in the fighting. He resigned under pressure after the liberation of Rome on June 18, 1944, and retired to private life. His book Italy in the Second World War (1948) is self-serving, but contains some interesting documentation.

Baffi, Paolo See BANCA D’ITALIA. Bakunin, Michael (1814–1876) Russian anarchist active in Italy This Russian anarchist chose post-unification Italy as the place to practice his philosophy of revolution, banking on peasant discontent in the South, a discontented intelligentsia, and the fragility of the recently unified state. Born to a family of the Russian aristocracy, Bakunin attended military school, resigned his commission, traveled to Europe, and gravitated toward socialism. Arrested by the Prussian police for his part in the REVOLUTIONS of 1848, he was extradited to Russia, where he spent 10 years in a Siberian prison camp (1851–61). He escaped, found his way back to Europe via North America, approached GIUSEPPE MAZZINI and Karl Marx in London, and made his way to Italy in January 1864 claiming to speak for both. He founded the Alliance for Social Democracy as a section of Marx’s First International. Winning the confidence and support of young radicals, Bakunin decided to go his own way. From his bases in Florence and Naples he orchestrated unsuccessful insurrections in 1867, 1870, and 1874. More of an inspirational figure than an organizer,

132 Balabanoff, Angelica

Bakunin undermined Mazzini’s appeal and laid the foundations for Italian ANARCHISM. Antiauthoritarian by temperament and creed, he opposed the centralized state, nationalism, and religion. The failure of his insurgencies and severe government repression dimmed his appeal. By the late 1870s many of his followers were turning to socialism, which they saw as the wave of the future.

Balabanoff, Angelica (1869–1965) Russian-born radical active in Italian socialism Balabanoff forsook her privileged family background to pursue radical causes outside her homeland. She studied in Brussels and Rome, was influenced by the Marxist theoretician ANTONIO LABRIOLA, and joined the Italian Socialist Party (PSI). As a socialist, she championed feminist issues. In Switzerland (1903–07), she propagandized among Italian workers and met the young expatriate BENITO MUSSOLINI, whom she took under her wing. She was instrumental in furthering Mussolini’s journalistic career in the Socialist Party, until 1914 when they broke over the issue of Italian intervention in WORLD WAR I. Thereafter she became an unswerving critic of Mussolini and his policies. Balabanoff went back to Switzerland when Italy went to war in 1915. As an internationalist, Balabanoff disapproved of the war and sought to end it. In 1916 she adopted Lenin’s position that pacifists should take advantage of the war to promote socialist revolution. She returned to Russia in May 1917 and supported the Bolshevik regime until 1921 when she left for Stockholm, Vienna, and eventually Paris (1926), where she linked up once again with Italian socialists in exile from Fascist Italy. She went to the United States in 1936 and returned to Italy in 1948, by then a critic of both FASCISM and Leninism. Her memoirs, My Life as a Rebel (1938), provide some fascinating insights into the world of radical politics.

Balbo, Cesare (1789–1853) writer, political strategist, and patriot Count Balbo was born in Turin to a family of the provincial aristocracy transplanted into the capital city. Of liberal sentiments, he was drawn to politics at an early age, held office during the Napoleonic occupation, and accompanied his father into political exile in Spain (1817–19). His political ideas matured in Spain. As a moderate liberal he favored a limited constitutional monarchy. Returning to Piedmont, he joined a group of moderate advisers around Prince CHARLES ALBERT, urging him in 1821 to accept a constitution but to avoid political conspiracies. His moderate views did not save him from internal exile for 10 years when the REVOLUTION of 1821 was suppressed. More a scholar than man of action, Balbo studied and wrote during his years of enforced political inactivity. He is remembered principally as the author of Le speranze d’Italia (On the Hopes of Italy, 1844). The book was dedicated to VINCENZO GIOBERTI, whose views on the future of Italy Balbo shared in part. Unlike Gioberti, however, Balbo was very much aware of Italy’s economic backwardness, did not believe in Gioberti’s notion of Italian “primacy” in the modern world, argued that free trade and economic development were necessary preconditions for political unity, and did not believe that the pope could serve as president of a national confederation. According to Balbo, unity should take the form of a confederation of autonomous states led by Piedmont-Sardinia. Thus, while the book was dedicated to Gioberti, it was really addressed to Charles Albert who had come to the throne in 1831. Balbo’s book also held out the prospect that Austria could be persuaded to accept Italian unification and the attendant loss of territory by territorial compensations in eastern Europe at the expense of the Ottoman Empire. Thus, according to Balbo, Italian unification could be achieved without having to fight the Austrians. Such arguments appealed to moderate patriots who wanted to avoid both war and revolution. In 1847 Balbo and CAVOUR founded

Balbo, Italo 133

the periodical Il Risorgimento, which reflected the views of moderate patriots. Balbo served as prime minister of Piedmont’s first constitutional government in March–July 1848, was active in parliament after stepping down as prime minister. His writings, which included Sommario della Storia d’Italia (Summary of the history of Italy, 1846), continued to shape public opinion, making a case for a peaceful resolution of the national question, loyalty to the HOUSE OF SAVOY and the CATHOLIC CHURCH, and warning of the dangers of revolution.

Balbo, Italo (1896–1940) Fascist leader and military figure Italo Balbo was born and raised in Ferrara in a middle-class family connected to the local nobility of the city and of Piedmont. Outgoing, impetuous, somewhat undisciplined in his youth, and also motivated by the patriotic traditions of the family, Balbo abandoned his studies to volunteer for military service in WORLD WAR I. Returning to civilian life as a decorated veteran, he graduated from the prestigious Cesare Alfieri Institute of Florence in 1920. In 1921 he joined the rising Fascist movement, organized action squads in the province of Ferrara, and soon emerged as a powerful ras (local chieftain) of the movement. An able organizer, he led punitive actions against political opponents in nearby provinces, until the Fascists controlled the entire Po Valley. In October 1922 he took charge of the military organization of the march on Rome. As head of the Fascist Militia, Balbo was responsible for many acts of violence and intimidation against political opponents. He was among the party leaders who pressured Mussolini to crack down on anti-Fascists during the GIACOMO MATTEOTTI crisis. As minister of aeronautics (1929–33) Balbo laid the basis of the modern Italian air force. He won international attention by personally leading team flights (crociere) across the Atlantic, the most famous involving 24 seaplanes that flew from Italy to Chicago and back

Italo Balbo (Library of Congress)

(1933). An international celebrity, his fame is said to have aroused Mussolini’s jealousy and fear that Balbo could develop into a political rival. On his return from Chicago, Mussolini appointed him governor of the Italian colony of Libya, an honorific post that had the advantage of keeping Balbo away from Italy. But the appointment did not keep Balbo out of the public eye. The wellpublicized projects that Balbo undertook in the colony included construction of the Via Balbia, a modern motor road 1,118 miles (1,800 kilometers) long along the Mediterranean coast from Tunisia to Egypt, and the settlement of 30,000 Italian agricultural colonists in Libya (1938–39). By 1940 there were approximately 100,000 Italian settlers in Libya among a native population

134 Baldini, Nullo

of 800,000. Balbo did not hide his opposition to the Fascist regime’s racial policies and the alliance with Nazi Germany. His command of Italian forces in Libya in WORLD WAR II was cut short when his plane was accidentally shot down by friendly fire on June 28, 1940, less than three weeks into the war. His death gave rise to the unfounded rumor that Mussolini had planned his death to rid himself of a dangerous rival. Balbo’s death, coming as it did before the humiliating military reverses that followed, reinforced the image of Balbo as a dissident who could stand up to Mussolini. While that view may exaggerate Balbo’s political courage, there is little doubt that both in life and death he personified the Fascist ideal of the man of action.

Baldini, Nullo See COOPERATIVISM. Balilla, Opera Nazionale See GIOVENTÙ ITALIANA DEL LITTORIO.

Balkans The Balkans, or the Balkan Peninsula, comprises ALBANIA, Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, the former state of Yugoslavia, and the European part of Turkey (the territory northwest of the Dardanelles). This is an area of historical interest for Italy because of the geographic proximity of Albania and Yugoslavia and the strategic importance of the Balkan Peninsula in the Mediterranean. Opportunities for trade and economic expansion have beckoned since the early Middle Ages when Venetian traders established bases and settlement colonies in the Balkans and resisted the Turkish advance toward the Adriatic Sea. Situated at a historic crossroad where Mediterranean and continental populations meet and mix, the Balkans have been contested ground throughout the centuries. In modern times, the Ottoman, Austrian, and Russian Empires have annexed or controlled parts of the region, aspiring to become dominant throughout. In the 19th century Great Britain emerged

as an important player in the politics of the region because of its interest in securing the Mediterranean lifeline of its empire. Italy has been a secondary player in the area since the decline of Venetian power in the 17th century. Before national unification, the Kingdom of Sardinia and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies had commercial contacts with the Balkans and some Italian political exiles found refuge there. Italian interest in the Balkans grew after national unification with the growth of trade and shipping. The marriage of the future king VICTOR EMMANUEL III to Princess Elena of Montenegro in 1896 was both a symptom and a cause of escalating Italian designs on the Balkans. In the first decade of the 20th century the Venetian businessman GIUSEPPE VOLPI established a strong Italian commercial presence in Montenegro and Albania. The recognition of Albanian independence in 1913 was an attempt by the great powers to head off competing Austrian and Italian claims to that country. Italian forces occupied Albania, Montenegro, and parts of Serbia during WORLD WAR I. After the war, and particularly during the period of FASCISM, Italian foreign policy aimed to establish complete control over Albania, destabilize and isolate Yugoslavia, gain possession of the coast of DALMATIA, and use those bases as the starting point for conquest or control of the rest of the Balkan Peninsula. The marriage of Princess Giovanna, daughter of Victor Emmanuel III, to King Boris III of Bulgaria in 1930 was part of Italy’s Balkan strategy. French and British opposition to Italian designs on the Balkans was one factor behind the Italian-German alliance that developed after 1935. But German and Italian policies also conflicted in the Balkans and, especially after Germany’s annexation of Austria in 1938, the two countries behaved more like rivals than partners in that part of Europe. The Italian military occupation of Albania in April 1939 was a response to the German occupation of Bohemia in March of that year. Italian military bases in Albania were directed against both Yugoslavia and Greece. It was from Albania that Italian forces launched their unsuccessful attack on Greece in October 1940. The botched

Banca Romana, scandal of 135

aggression opened up new opportunities for Germany in Bulgaria and Romania. Both countries were pressured by Germany into entering WORLD WAR II on the side of the Axis powers. Germany intervened militarily in Yugoslavia in April 1941 to help the Italians still fighting on the Greek front and to consolidate Germany’s dominance of the Balkans. The armistice of September 1943 eliminated the Italian troops as an independent presence, some becoming German prisoners of war, others joining the fight against Germany, and some choosing to fight on to protect Italian lives and interests in Istria and Dalmatia. The Italian presence in the Balkans since World War II has been mainly economic and cultural. Italian television introduced Western products and cultural models to parts of the Balkans under communist rule. In this new guise, Italy carried on its traditional role of communicator and mediator between Western and Eastern Europe. An Italian presence, both civilian and military, has existed in Albania and parts of the former independent state of Yugoslavia since the early 1990s, as part of United Nations programs and NATO operations. A close economic, cultural, and political relationship prevails with the independent state of Slovenia, which is territorially adjacent to northern Italy.

Banca Commerciale Italiana See BANKING; CUCCIA, ENRICO.

Banca d’Italia (Bank of Italy) The Bank of Italy, the country’s central bank, was established in 1893 following the scandal of the BANCA ROMANA that rocked the Italian financial world. Until 1926, when it became the sole bank of issue, it shared the authority to issue paper currency with the Bank of Naples and Bank of Sicily. The Bank of Italy has played a central role in the economic development of the country. Under the capable leadership of Bonaldo Stringher (1854–1930), who was its director from 1900 to 1930, it regulated the supply of money, maintained a stable exchange rate, and

provided credit to fuel economic growth. As the lender of last resort, it extended emergency loans and prevented business bankruptcies. As a state institution open to public scrutiny, it inspired trust in public policy, the stability of the currency, and the reliability of financial markets. The economic growth of the period 1900–13 was due in great measure to the steady course set by Stringher. The bank tightened its grip on the economy in the 1920s and 1930s, when it became a full-fledged bankers’ bank, with exclusive rights of issue and regulatory powers over other banks. Stringher was the first in a series of remarkable public servants who have headed the bank. Under the directorship of LUIGI EINAUDI (1945–47) and Donato Menichella (1947–60), it brought inflation under control and stabilized the exchange rate at 620–630 lire to the American dollar. The stable exchange rate contributed to the postwar reconstruction of the economy. Under Guido Carli (1960–75) and Paolo Baffi (1975–80), it steered the economy through recession and political instability. Under CARLO AZEGLIO CIAMPI (1980–92), it reduced the public debt, curbed inflation, and strengthened the currency to prepare the country for admission to the European Monetary System. In 1992 the Banca d’Italia took over from the treasury responsibility for setting the official exchange rate and was no longer obliged to lend to the government. These and other measures, including privatization of some of its assets, were designed to free the bank from political party pressures that might otherwise compromise its regulatory role. In 2004 the bank was challenged by the Berlusconi government, which tried unsuccessfully to curb its regulatory powers. It will be redefined as the country is fully integrated into the EUROPEAN UNION.

Banca Romana, scandal of The Roman Bank was founded in 1835 by French and Belgian investors. It became the official bank of the PAPAL STATES in 1851. In 1874 the Italian government made it one of six national banks authorized to issue currency under pub-

136 Banco Ambrosiano, scandal of

lic regulation. An audit of the bank carried out in 1889 revealed serious irregularities in the activities of the bank, including issuing of currency beyond set limits and printing of false banknotes. The government suppressed the report, fearing that a major scandal would rock the economy and undermine public confidence in government. The scandal broke nonetheless in December 1892, when members of the political opposition read excerpts of the report into the parliamentary record and leaked it to the press. GIOVANNI GIOLITTI, then in his first term as prime minister, sponsored a banking reform (1893) that liquidated the Roman Bank and restricted currency issuance to the newly founded BANCA D’ITALIA and to the banks of Naples and Sicily. Giolitti’s reform was well conceived, but his reputation suffered because as treasury minister in 1889 he had agreed to the suppression of the original report, borrowed money from the Bank of Rome for government purposes, and nominated the bank’s governor, Bernardo Tanlongo (1820–96), to the senate. The political aftershocks of the scandal continued to reverberate for years, tarnishing the reputations of both Giolitti and FRANCESCO CRISPI, who preceded and succeeded Giolitti as prime minister.

Banco Ambrosiano, scandal of Financial improprieties in the affairs of this Milanese bank that came to light in 1980 showed a deficit of some $790 million and $1.4 billion in unsecured loans to foreign subsidiaries. The prospect of bankruptcy and collapse of public confidence in the banking system prompted the government to take extraordinary measures, including the temporary closing of the stock market and the start of an investigation that pointed to a network of connections linking the Banco Ambrosiano to the Vatican, the activities of convicted financier Michele Sindona (1921–86), who was then serving a prison sentence in the United States for financial fraud, the MAFIA, the shadowy world of Licio Gelli’s Masonic lodge PROPAGANDA 2, and various public figures. The

Ambrosiano’s president, Roberto Calvi (1921–82), ousted and convicted of currency fraud, escaped during his appeal and was found hanging from Blackfriars Bridge in London. His secretary committed suicide by jumping out a window, an investigating magistrate was assassinated, and Sindona died mysteriously in jail of cyanide poisoning. There was enough to justify subjecting the financial operations of the Vatican to close scrutiny. The Ambrosiano went bankrupt two months after Calvi’s death, leaving more than $1 billion in debts. The scandal, the many unresolved issues associated with it, and the press campaign that suggested widespread corruption in the business and political worlds contributed to the crisis of public confidence that gripped the country in the 1980s and led to the political reforms in the 1990s.

Banco di Napoli See BANKING. Banco di Roma Founded in 1880 by a group of investors with close ties to the Vatican, the Bank of Rome expanded beyond its regional base to become the first Italian bank with a strong presence abroad. The opening of a branch in Paris in 1902 was the start of a major expansion of its branches throughout the Mediterranean area. In the following decade the bank opened branches in Egypt, Malta, Spain, and in Constantinople. When the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR broke out in 1911, the Bank of Rome had 18 branches in Libya. Its presence in lands that were part of the Ottoman Empire, and presumably the Vatican’s religious interest in these Muslim lands, made the Bank of Rome a supporter of Italian political expansion in North Africa and the Near East. The fact that one of the bank’s directors, Romolo Tittoni, was the brother of the Italian foreign minister TOMMASO TITTONI also suggests that there may have been a connection between the bank’s interests and the government’s colonial policy. After WORLD WAR I the bank opened additional

Bandini, Sallustio Antonio 137

branches in Lebanon, Palestine, and Syria. But its expansion was inadequately financed and poorly administered. In the postwar years the bank experienced a severe financial crisis, from which it was rescued in 1923 by the newly installed government of BENITO MUSSOLINI, which had a stake in preserving the bank’s positions abroad and in healing the conflict of CHURCH AND STATE. The overextended network of foreign branches brought considerable financial losses to the bank, requiring additional subsidies from the government in the 1930s. The bank’s industrial holdings were nationalized as part of these rescue operations and absorbed by the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (IRI). In the 1930s the international operations of the bank were an integral part of the Fascist regime’s expansionist policies. WORLD WAR II put an end to both the regime’s and the bank’s designs, forcing the bank to relinquish many of its positions abroad. The Vatican distanced itself from the bank in 1942, when Pope PIUS XII established the Institute for Religious Works as an independent bank for the administration of religious funds.

Banco di San Giorgio See BANKING.

dence. Given the Austrian government’s opposition to Italian independence and the brothers’ oath of loyalty to the empire, that commitment was tantamount to treason. In June 1844, acting on false and misleading information possibly planted by spies, Attilio and Emilio went to the aid of what they believed to be an ongoing insurrection against the Neapolitan government. Landing on the coast of CALABRIA with 19 companions, they were all quickly captured by government troops. Those who survived the initial encounter, including the Bandiera brothers, were executed by firing squad on July 25, 1844. Regarded as martyrs to the cause of national independence, the story of the Bandiera brothers became part of the heroic saga of the RISORGIMENTO. The affair had an important aftermath in England, where the political exile GIUSEPPE MAZZINI charged that the British government had violated the privacy of his correspondence by intercepting his mail with the Bandiera brothers and passing on compromising information to the Austrian government. The ensuing scandal embarrassed the British government and generated public support for the Italian movement in England. With its public and private dramas and murky background, the affair of the Bandiera brothers was a cause célèbre that focused public attention on the Italian question.

Banco di Sicilia See BANKING. Bandiera brothers

Bandini, Sallustio Antonio (1677–1760)

patriots and martyrs for the cause of Italian independence Attilio, born in 1810, and his brother Emilio, born in 1819, were sons of a Venetian family serving the AUSTRIAN EMPIRE. Their father, Francesco Bandiera (1785–1847), held the rank of admiral in the Austrian navy, and his two sons were also commissioned naval officers. Many sailors and officers in the Austrian navy came from Austria’s Italian provinces and Italian was the navy’s official language. The Bandiera brothers founded a secret society called Esperia that was committed to fighting for Italian indepen-

public figure and economic reformer Born to a prominent family of Siena, Bandini received a degree in philosophy and civil law (1699) and held the chair of canon law at the city’s university (1700–05). Choosing to pursue an ecclesiastical career in 1705, he became an influential adviser to the archbishop of Siena, promoted reforms in the Sienese administration, and encouraged scientific education and research. Like many public administrators of his time, Bandini was concerned with promoting agricultural and commercial reforms that would ensure a steady supply of cereals, a concern dictated by a

138 banditry

growing population and by the fear of popular unrest. His experiences as a landowner and administrator made him aware that state regulations often interfered with production. He proposed a vast program of land reclamation in the depopulated Tuscan maremma, a desolate land in the southern part of the region, government protection of agriculture, and limited free trade in cereals. Although not an advocate of unrestricted free trade, Bandini nevertheless began to question the mercantilist doctrines that regulated both trade and the money supply. His ideas moved cautiously away from the pursuit of agricultural self-sufficiency toward the ideal of free trade. Bandini’s pragmatic reformism influenced the economically liberal legislation of the Tuscan state after his death.

banditry See BRIGANDAGE. Banfield, Edward C. See FAMILISM. banking Italian banking families dominated the field of domestic and international finance from the 14th to the 16th centuries. Devising ways of circumventing the Catholic Church’s prohibition against charging interest on loans (usury), Italian bankers became rich and powerful by lending, changing, and transferring money across Europe, and trading in goods as a collateral activity. The Bardi family of Florence did well initially by lending to the English royal dynasty, but went bankrupt in 1345–46 when Edward III defaulted on his debts. More fortunate were the MEDICI, who founded their own bank in 1397, and became the wealthiest family of Europe, before also going into decline during the 16th century. Their financial demise was part of the larger crisis of 16th-century Italy, which some banking institutions managed to survive. The Banco di San Giorgio of Genoa remained profitable by tak-

ing advantage of lending and investment opportunities in Spain and its far-flung colonial empire. Founded in 1407, it shut its doors in 1816. Another survivor was the Monte dei Paschi of SIENA. Founded in 1369 to guarantee repayment of the Sienese public debt from the leasing of grazing lands (paschi), by the 17th century it had developed into a full-fledged banking operation, probably the first of its kind in Europe. It is today one of the oldest and most successful banking institutions in the world. At a more modest level, charitable institutions called monti di pietà were founded in the 15th century to free ordinary borrowers from dependence on pawnshops and reduce popular hostility and violence toward the Jews who owned these shops. The monti were the precursors of modern savings banks that deal with ordinary depositors. The modern Italian banking system developed after national unification from such precedents. Six different banks inherited from pre-unification states were authorized to issue banknotes and engage in lending operations. With minimal coordination and lax government supervision, speculative ventures and questionable lending practices came to a head in the early 1890s. A crisis in the building industry, the resulting collapse of the overexposed BANCA ROMANA, and a string of bank failures between 1889 and 1893 revealed the inadequacies of the national banking system. The ensuing reform established the BANCA D’ITALIA (1893) as the national bank, sharing currency issuance with the Banco di Napoli and the Banco di Sicilia. In the private sector, the Banca Commerciale Italiana, founded in 1894, adopted the German model of “mixed” banking, which used depositors’ money to extend medium- and long-term loans to industry. Used aggressively by its long-time director Giuseppe Toeplitz (1866–1938), the system funneled savings toward industry, fueled rapid industrial expansion, and established the close relationship between industry and banking that has been the enduring feature of the Italian financial system.

Barberini family 139

In the 1920s the bankers first beat back efforts by industrialists to gain control of the banks, then consolidated their control of major industrial sectors. What the industrialists could not do in the 1920s, the government did in the 1930s when industrial production slumped and industry could not repay its huge debts to the banks. The government bailed out the banks, took their industrial share holdings as collateral, and gained control of much of private industry. Thus was born the public sector of the Italian economy that was managed by the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (IRI). In the process of restructuring the banking system, the Banca Commerciale, Banco di Roma, and Credito Italiano became publicly owned institutions subject to government control. The Banking Act of 1936 prohibited banks from extending long-term credit to industry, leaving industrialists largely dependent on the stock market, which could not meet the needs of industry. Government lending came with strings attached. This centralized banking system survived the fall of FASCISM. In the period of postwar reconstruction (1945–50), it stabilized the CURRENCY and brought inflation under control. The system performed a similar function after the economic setbacks of the 1970s. By the 1990s Italian banking, which until then had been shielded from foreign competition, was feeling pressure from the outside. In the years of protection, banks had made major investments in noncompetitive industries like steel, machinery, chemicals, and in costly ventures for the economic development of the South. They could no longer do so in the new climate of “globalization” and economic integration. The slow and painful process of restructuring and adjustment that began in the early 1990s continues to this day. The privatization of the Bank of Italy in 1992 was followed by the privatization of the other public banks, including the Banca Commerciale, in the late 1990s. Major mergers are still going on to make Italian banking competitive in the context of European economic integration.

Baratieri, Oreste (1841–1901) colonial governor and army general Born near Trent under Austrian rule, Baratieri fought as a volunteer under GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI in 1860, then transferred to the regular army. He distinguished himself for bravery in the unfortunate Battle of Custoza (1866) and fought again under Garibaldi in the Franco-Prussian War with the rank of captain. He won recognition for his military writings and administrative ability. Appointed governor of the colony of Eritrea in 1892, he improved the administration, reordered the judiciary, and made the colony financially self-supporting. In 1894–95 he led successful sorties against rebellious populations. Favored by Prime Minister FRANCESCO CRISPI, who approved of his political past and admired his élan, Baratieri was put in command of a punitive expedition against the Ethiopian emperor Menelik II, who had gone to the aid of Eritrean insurgents. Urged to act by Crispi, who wanted a quick colonial victory, Baratieri yielded to political pressure. Against his better judgment, he launched an offensive that ended in disaster near Adowa in Ethiopian territory. Inaccurate maps, poor reconnaissance, and incompetent leadership led 16,500 troops into an ambush that in one single day cost the Italians 6,000 dead and 1,900 prisoners. News of the defeat rocked the country and brought down Crispi’s government. Baratieri was recalled and tried by a military tribunal. Although he was exonerated, the defeat put an end to his military career. His other achievements forgotten, he is remembered as the general responsible for humiliation that rankled nationalist feelings until the defeat of Adowa was “avenged” by the invasion of Ethiopia in 1935–36.

Barberini family The Barberini family rose to power thanks to its close ties to the CATHOLIC CHURCH and Spain in the 16th and 17th centuries. Originally from Siena, they moved first to Florence and then

140 Bardi family

Bardi family See BANKING.

made quite a splash in its brief but stormy life (1763–64). While reviewing the major literary works of the time, the journal lashed out at just about every contemporary Italian writer, accusing some of aping foreign fashions and others of being obtusely traditional. He was particularly hard on the rival journal Il Caffè, which he accused of imitating the French, and on the Accademia della Crusca, the self-appointed guardian of linguistic purity that stood in the way of change. The efforts at language reform by the Arcadian movement he dismissed as superficial and childish. What did Baretti stand for? Some have seen him simply as a cantankerous figure driven by personal passions and resentments. While his personality may have had much to do with the tone of his polemics, the issues that he raised were timely and legitimate. His insistence that there was such a thing as a common and unique Italian culture anticipated the later concerns of ROMANTICISM. Above all, Baretti advised aspiring Italian writers to have faith in themselves as individuals, follow their personal inclinations, and be critical both of tradition and current fashions. The Italian language, whose use he advocated for writers throughout the peninsula, should be allowed to develop freely, respectful of the past but in touch with the present. It was his tone more than his message that irritated many of his compatriots. When his journal shut down, Baretti returned to England where he promoted the study of Italian language and culture.

Baretti, Giuseppe (1719–1789)

Bari, city of

literary critic and polemicist Like other Piemontese intellectuals of his generation, Baretti, born in Turin, fled his native region for places abroad that were more receptive to the life of the mind. Baretti went to London in 1751, struck up a friendship with Samuel Johnson, and became part of his literary circle. He returned to Italy in 1760 to launch a journal of literary criticism modeled on the English Spectator. The Frusta Letteraria (The Literary Lash)

The capital of the region of PUGLIA, Bari (pop. 332,000) is southern Italy’s major port on the Adriatic Sea and the country’s most important contact point for trade with the countries of the eastern Mediterranean and the Near East. An annual trade fair, the Fiera del Levante, showcases Italian products for trade purposes. Probably founded by Balkan populations, the city prospered under the Greeks and Romans. In the Middle Ages it was contested and controlled at

Rome, where they rose to prominence. Maffeo Barberini became Pope URBAN VIII in 1623. He consolidated the power of the family by appointing relatives to major civil and ecclesiastical positions. With Spain on their side, the Barberini seemed poised to become the dominant power in Italy, until other ruling families formed a coalition against them, backed by France. The two sides clashed in the so-called War of Castro (1642–44), in which the combined forces of Modena, Parma, Tuscany, and Venice were able to check papal power and curb the Barberini. The family was banished from Rome after the death of Urban VIII in 1644 and its riches confiscated. Cardinal Jules Mazarin (1602–61), chief adviser to the French monarchy, took up their cause and used military force to restore the Barberini to their position and wealth in Rome. Thenceforth, the family avoided dangerous political causes and entanglements, solidifying its power with advantageous marriages and profitable investments. The imposing Barberini Palace in Rome, begun in 1625, was the family residence. Its once-rich art collection was sold and dispersed long ago. The Barberini’s enthusiasm for building construction was proverbial. Their quarrying of materials from ancient Roman buildings for their own projects prompted the saying, Quod non facerunt Barbari facerunt Barberini (What the Barbarians didn’t do, the Barberini did).

baroque 141

various times by Goths, Byzantines, Lombards, Saracens, Germans, and Normans. In the 11th century it became part of what later would be called the KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES, which was absorbed by the Italian state in 1860. The old part of the city (Bari vecchia) is a maze of alleys close to the port and around the ancient Basilica of Saint Nicholas, the city’s patron saint. The modern city (Bari nuova) was begun after 1800, expanded after 1860 with the arrival of the railroad, and was further amplified by the Fascist regime to stimulate trade and extend Italian influence in the Near East. The new city is laid out in a well-planned geometrical pattern. It comprises both an industrial zone and popular residential quarters. Its industrial firms are mostly small and medium-scale, specializing in construction materials, textiles, engineering, and petrochemicals. The University of Bari is an important cultural center for the entire region.

Baronio, Cesare (1538–1607) (Baronius) church scholar and religious reformer Born near Frosinone, Baronio studied law, was ordained a priest in 1564, appointed cardinal in 1596, chief church librarian in 1597, and served as personal adviser and confessor to Pope Clement VIII. He is credited with prevailing on the pope to accept the conversion to Catholicism of King Henry IV of France. Baronio’s papal candidacy was blocked by Spain in 1605. A disciple of religious reformer Saint Filippo Neri (1515–95), Baronio took it upon himself to show by historical research that the reforms proposed by the COUNCIL OF TRENT were rooted in the traditions of the church and were not simply a response to Protestantism. His intensive labors over more than 20 years produced the 12 large volumes of the Annales ecclesiatici (Church annals, 1588– 1607). The Annales provided answers to practical questions of religious reform by tracing the historical development of doctrinal issues and religious practices over the course of centuries. The unfinished work was continued by his suc-

cessors, but he had done enough to secure his position as the foremost church historian of his time and founder of modern church history.

baroque The term baroque, probably derived from barroco (an irregular pearl), designates an artistic style that prevailed from the early part of the 17th to the middle of the 18th century. The term, coined in the 18th century, reflected the distaste that the artists of the ENLIGHTENMENT felt for a style rooted in the preceding century. To them, baroque meant misshapen, odd, irregular, confused, and confusing. The large scale and profusion of forms and colors typical of baroque art aimed for theatrical effect. The baroque style in architecture and the visual arts aimed to overwhelm the onlooker with a display of dynamic forms and expressions of emotional intensity. Critics objected to its rejection of the classical norms of balance, symmetry, and restraint. Like MANNERISM, which preceded it in time, the Baroque spread from Italy to other parts of Europe, particularly to the possessions of the Spanish and Austrian Habsburgs, including the Spanish possessions in America. It had little influence in France, where the monarchy favored the classical style. Although the baroque style permeated secular art, as evident in the many palaces of the aristocracy and works of art commissioned by lay patrons, the spread of the new style was closely associated with the COUNCIL OF TRENT and the Catholic revival that aimed at reclaiming the territories lost to Protestantism. The monumentality of baroque religious art and the richness of its ornamentation were meant to draw the faithful into a world of visual splendor. The use of columns made possible the construction of enormous buildings with impressive façades, large interiors, and enormous enclosed plazas like St. Peter’s Square in Rome, with its colonnaded arms that reach out as if to embrace the faithful. Baroque paintings teeming with figures covered enormous canvases painted in striking colors. Small-scale works in the spirit of

142 Bartali, Gino

baroque were the exception. Statues depicted the human form in contorted poses meant to express intensity of feeling. In Italy, GIAN LORENZO BERNINI best represents the baroque style in architecture and sculpture.

Bartali, Gino See SPORTS. Barzini, Luigi, Sr. (1874–1947), and Barzini, Luigi, Jr. (1908–1984) father and son, journalists and political commentators Barzini Sr. was a popular and influential journalist and war correspondent who covered world events for major newspapers, including the liberal Il Corriere della Sera and the Fascist Il Popolo d’Italia. After visiting the United States in 1921 to cover the Washington Naval Conference, he decided to launch a newspaper for Italian-Americans. Il Corriere d’America started to publish in 1923. Barzini sold it in 1931 when he returned to Italy. His pro-Fascist sentiments gave him entry into the highest political circles of the Fascist regime. BENITO MUSSOLINI made him a senator in 1934. As a correspondent for Il Popolo d’Italia, Barzini covered the Spanish civil war and the Russian campaign in WORLD WAR II. He continued to collaborate with Mussolini in the period of the ITALIAN SOCIAL REPUBLIC. For an example of his early reporting, see his Peking to Paris: A Journey across Two Continents in 1907 (1972). The son, Luigi Barzini Jr., also a journalist and a writer of note, was particularly popular in the English-speaking world. Born in Milan, he attended Columbia University in New York City and began his journalistic career working for the New York World. He returned to Italy in 1931, worked for Il Corriere della Sera, and frequented the group of young dissidents that gravitated around GALEAZZO CIANO. He was arrested in April 1940 on charges of leaking confidential information to the enemy and making disparaging remarks about Mussolini. After WORLD WAR II he

wrote for major newspapers and magazines as an independent journalist. Staunch anticommunist, he represented the Liberal Party (PLI) in the chamber of deputies from 1958 to 1976. His book The Italians (1965), written for the general reader, was a major publishing success that introduced many Anglo-Saxon readers to Italian life and culture.

Basilicata The southern region of Basilicata (pop. 606,000), formerly called Lucania from the name of its ancient inhabitants, occupies the instep of the peninsula, bordering on the Gulf of Taranto in the Ionian Sea, the region of CALABRIA to the south, the Tyrrhenian Sea to the southwest, the region of CAMPANIA to the north, and the region of PUGLIA to the northeast. It is the most mountainous and least densely populated of the southern regions. The rugged interior, difficult communications, arid soil, and malaria in the lowlands have discouraged settlement. Heavy deforestation from the latter part of the 19th century has caused major problems of erosion and soil instability. The forests that covered most of the region in ancient times now occupy less than 10 percent of the territory. Emigration abroad and to the industrial cities of northern Italy has siphoned off a large part of the population. The two principal cities are Potenza, which is the regional capital, and Matera. Matera is known for its picturesque section of I Sassi dating back to the eighth century. It is a cluster of cave-like dwellings, churches, narrow alleys, and small piazzas carved out of the mountainside, inhabited until the middle of the 20th century. The economy of the region has been traditionally agricultural, with a small but developing industrial sector dominated by small and medium-sized firms. Cereals, olives, grapes, and other fruits are the principal agricultural products. The range of industrial products includes textiles, processed food, wine, building materials, and wood products. Public administration is the principal source of white-collar employment.

Bauer, Riccardo 143

It has been historically difficult to enforce government authority in this region. The bloody repression of BRIGANDAGE by the army in the 1860s did not endear the national government to the local population and contributed to the massive exodus of people from the region. As perhaps the most economically depressed region, Basilicata exemplifies the seriousness and complexity of the SOUTHERN QUESTION.

of capitalism in every form, Basso spoke for an intransigent socialist minority that opposed political accommodation with the parties in power, called for political action by the masses, and for major structural reforms of the economy. Marginalized politically in his later years, Basso was a respected and effective figure in public debate until his death.

Battisti, Cesare (1875–1916) Bassani, Giorgio See JEWS IN ITALY. Basso, Lelio (1903–1978) political figure, writer, and public commentator Born near the Ligurian city of Savona, Basso was an intellectual prominent in public debate and a political activist of the Left. He received a law degree in 1925. A critic of bourgeois society and an anti-Fascist, he collaborated with PIERO GOBETTI. He was arrested in 1928 and interned in a concentration camp in 1939–40. Anticipating the collapse of the Fascist regime, Basso began to work for the revival of socialism in Italy. In 1943 he launched the Movement for Proletarian Unity (Movimento di Unità Proletaria, or MUP), which later gave life to a new socialist party, the Italian Socialist Party for Proletarian Unity (PSIUP), which was meant to bridge the gap between socialists and communists. When socialists and communists emerged from the war as separate entities, Basso and his followers stayed with the Italian Socialist Party (PSI) during its period of collaboration with the communists. Basso served as PSI secretary-general in 1947–49 and represented it in parliament. When the PSI changed tactics in 1963, distanced itself from the Communist Party (PCI), and sought an accommodation with the Christian Democratic Party (DC), Basso and his followers revived the PSIUP in January 1964 to promote unity of action on the Left. Basso served as PSIUP president until his resignation in 1970. An unbending critic of NATO, of the Vietnam War, of American foreign policy, and

socialist journalist and irredentist A leading figure of Italian IRREDENTISM, Battisti was born to a well-off family of businessmen in Austrian-ruled TRENT. In 1893 he entered the University of Florence where he studied literature and joined socialist circles. As a journalist in his native city, he published reviews that propagandized for both socialism and irredentism, calling simultaneously for protection of workers and of Italian national identity within the multinational AUSTRIAN EMPIRE. BENITO MUSSOLINI was one of his collaborators in this struggle. Elected to the Austrian parliament in 1911, Battisti demanded administrative autonomy for the Italian-speaking TRENTINO. When WORLD WAR I broke out in August 1914, Battisti urged the Italian government and public opinion to declare war against Austria-Hungary. He volunteered for military service when Italy did go to war in May 1915, and distinguished himself for valor in several actions. Captured by the Austrians, he was tried for treason and executed by hanging in July 1916. Battisti was reviled in Austria as a traitor and revered in Italy as a national martyr. The Fascist regime eulogized his memory and every schoolchild learned of his love and sacrifice for Italy.

Bauer, Riccardo (1896–1982) journalist, anti-Fascist activist, social philosopher, and political commentator Bauer was born in Milan, studied economics, served as a volunteer in WORLD WAR I, and began a career in journalism in the 1920s as an anti-

144 Bazzi, Giovanni Antonio

Fascist. He was editor of the anti-Fascist weekly Il Caffè, collaborated with PIERO GOBETTI and FERRUCCIO PARRI, and helped political prisoners escape from jail. He was arrested in 1927 and released a year later. Arrested again in 1930, he was sentenced to a 20-year prison term. In jail Bauer met CARLO ROSSELLI, with whom he collaborated in launching the movement Giustizia e Libertà. He was a founding member of the ACTION PARTY and an organizer of the armed RESISTANCE. Bauer’s antifascism was rooted in his commitment to the ideals of individual freedom and social justice. He rejected communism, class warfare, and interpreted the resistance as a movement to affirm the principle of creative freedom. His struggle was against authority, hierarchy, and social subordination. A revolutionary in principle, Bauer rejected terrorist violence and relied on education to foster the spirit of freedom. He continued to speak out for democratic ideals as a journalist after the war, showing no interest in holding political office.

Bazzi, Giovanni Antonio See SODOMA. Beauharnais, Eugène de (1781–1824) Napoleonic viceroy and reformer The son of Josephine Bonaparte from her first marriage, Eugène served his stepfather NAPOLEON I loyally from 1798 when he went with him on the Egyptian campaign until his fall in 1815. Napoleon adopted Eugène, appointed him viceroy of the Kingdom of Italy in 1805, and in 1806 designated him to be his successor should he die without a male heir. As viceroy, Beauharnais turned the capital city of MILAN into a vibrant and magnificent court center, introduced administrative reforms, and created an Italian army loyal to Napoleon. The favoritism that he showed toward the French in his appointments, the high taxes that he levied to help finance Napoleon’s war machine, and the fact that he was a foreigner created resentment among his Italian subjects. He was nevertheless respected,

and under his leadership the Kingdom of Italy was perhaps the best administered of Napoleon’s satellite states. He commanded an Italian force of 27,000 during the Russian campaign and assumed command of the entire French army in Russia during the disastrous retreat. Even in defeat, he refused to distance himself and the Kingdom of Italy from Napoleon. Deposed like all other Napoleonic rulers by the CONGRESS OF VIENNA, Beauharnais received compensation in the form of titles of nobility and a life pension.

Beccaria, Cesare (1738–1794) Enlightenment writer and reformer Born to a noble family of Milan, Beccaria was educated by Jesuits and took a degree in law at the University of Pavia. Influenced by the ideas of the ENLIGHTENMENT, he joined a group of young Milanese reformers around the journal Il Caffè. Under their influence, he wrote the study that would make him famous. The book Dei delitti e delle pene (Of crimes and punishments, 1764), gained immediate attention and brought him fame as a progressive, innovative thinker. Condemning the indiscriminate use of torture to obtain confessions from suspects and the frequent application of the death sentence for even minor crimes, Beccaria made a case for abolishing torture, making punishment proportionate to the crime, rehabilitating criminals, and reserving the death penalty only for the most heinous crimes. The book, a classic text of modern criminology, has influenced penal reform throughout the western world. Beccaria also wrote on art, economics, government, taught, and served in the public administration, but his name is indelibly tied to the book that made him famous.

Belgioioso, Cristina (1808–1871) Milanese noblewoman, radical patriot, and pioneering feminist Born in Milan to the patrician family of the Trivulzio, she was raised by a liberal stepfather who saw to it that she received a good educa-

Belli, Giuseppe Gioacchino 145

tion. Unhappy at home where parental discord prevailed, at the age of 16 she married Prince Emilio Barbiano di Belgioioso (1800–58) against the wishes of her family. She thus acquired the title of princess, which she retained after the couple’s separation. She joined the secret sect of the CARBONERIA as a giardiniera (auxiliary) and became an exuberant if somewhat indiscreet political conspirator. Her commitments to the causes of Italian independence, social justice, and women’s liberation never wavered, but her enemies seized upon her unconventional and often disorderly personal life, punctuated by many love affairs, to undermine her credibility. She was an early backer of GIUSEPPE MAZZINI, whose republicanism she shared at this stage of her life. From 1831 to 1848 she wrote for newspapers and traveled in France, Italy, and England, meeting some of the most notable artistic and political personalities of her time, including the future NAPOLEON III, who may have been one of her lovers. She participated in the REVOLUTIONS of 1848 in Milan, Naples, and Rome. In 1849 she organized a military nursing corps in Rome that predated Florence Nightingale’s similar initiative by four years. From 1849 to 1853, perhaps to avoid arrest in western Europe, where she was on a wanted list, she traveled extensively in eastern Europe and Asia Minor, going as far as Jerusalem and penning highly colorful descriptions of her travels. She returned to Paris in 1853 in poor health and probably suffering from an addiction to opium formed during her travels. By then her politics had turned moderate, she had abandoned republicanism, and welcomed the unification of Italy under the HOUSE OF SAVOY, of which she published a laudatory history in 1860. She lived the last years of her life in retirement.

Bellarmine, Robert (1542–1621) Roman Catholic prelate and scholar This prominent Jesuit scholar, cardinal, and canonized saint, was born in the Tuscan town of Montepulciano to a family prominent in church

affairs. He was ordained in 1570 and took up the chair of religious studies at the Jesuit Roman College in 1576. From that position, and later as rector of the school and adviser to the pope, he contributed to the most important religious and theological debates of his time. He generally took a moderate position on most issues, thus incurring the displeasure of both innovators and traditionalists. He was made a cardinal in 1599. On the issue of relations between popes and secular rulers, Bellarmine argued that the pope could depose rulers who abused their trust. He even went on to argue the daring proposition that while God established the secular power, the people should have a voice in how it was exercised. In the famous controversy with GALILEO over the nature of the solar system, Bellarmine took the position that Galileo had a right to propound his views as long as he presented them as theoretical constructs capable of explaining observed phenomena, and not as an unassailable representation of reality. Learned and subtle, Bellarmine’s work attempted to reconcile traditional dogma with the new understanding of politics and nature.

Belli, Giuseppe Gioacchino (1791–1863) popular poet and satirist Although born to a well-off Roman family, Belli was orphaned at an early age and spent much of his life in straitened circumstances. Driven by intellectual curiosity, he made up what he lacked in formal education by reading widely on his own. He is chiefly remembered for his writings in the Roman dialect, recognition for which came to him fairly late in life. His decision to write in dialect reflected his conviction that only by using the everyday language of ordinary people could literature capture the vitality of a living language and the culture of the people. Using the sonnet as his form, he portrayed Roman life realistically, depicting its seamier aspects in the coarse language of the streets. His realism reflected an aspect of the culture of ROMANTICISM, which drew attention to the daily

146 Bellini, Vincenzo

struggles, beliefs, and aspirations of the people. But unlike most romantic writers, Belli did not idealize the people. Christian acceptance of flawed human nature made him tolerant of their shortcomings. He valued the sincerity, spontaneity, and common sense that he found among ordinary people, and condemned the hypocrisy of the educated. Belli’s populist sympathies had no adverse political consequences. Valuing domesticity and the quiet life, he avoided giving offense to the PAPACY or political interests.

Bellini, Vincenzo (1801–1835) opera composer Born to musicians in the Sicilian city of Catania (his father was an organist), Bellini’s musical talent was nurtured at an early age by the family, before the young man was sent to study at the Naples conservatory in 1819. In his relatively brief career, cut short by early death, Bellini won public acclaim for his unique melodic gift and ability to express sentiment in long musical phrases ideally suited to the human voice. His distinctly personal style reflects the influence of his older contemporary GIOACCHINO ROSSINI and of Sicilian and Neapolitan folk music. His first successful productions in Naples earned him an invitation to write for the most prestigious opera house in Italy, Milan’s La Scala, where he staged the opera Il pirata (1827) with enormous success. He was again successful in Venice with the staging of I Capuleti ed i Montecchi (1830), based on the story of Romeo and Juliet. His two bestknown operas, La sonnabula and Norma, were both produced in 1831. Bellini lived in Milan from 1827 to 1833, when he left that city for extended visits to Paris and London. Wherever he went, he basked in the adulation of enthusiastic fans. In Paris he struck up a close friendship with Chopin, who considered Bellini the most gifted melodist of their generation. In London he met and fell madly in love with the soprano Maria Malibran (1808–36), but that was just one of several passionate affairs he had with leading

Vincenzo Bellini (Library of Congress)

ladies of the operatic stage. I puritani, his last opera, was performed to major acclaim in Paris in January 1835, with the Milanese soprano Giulia Grisi (1811–69) in the principal female role. Bellini died in a Paris suburb in September of that same year, probably of amebic dysentery, although legend soon had it that a jealous husband had poisoned him. Rossini, GIUSEPPE VERDI, and Richard Wagner all admired Bellini’s music. Although Bellini had no discernible political views, his music did not fail to inspire Italian patriots fighting for national unification. GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI is thought to have been inspired by the duet Suoni la tromba (Let the trumpet sound) from I puritani, in which two rivals in love come together to fight in the cause of liberty. Bellini’s

Benedict XV 147

music appealed irresistibly to the romantic sensibility that expected music and theater to express strong feelings and high ideals.

Bembo, Pietro (1470–1547) writer, linguist, and literary critic Bembo was born to a family of the Venetian nobility, spent his youth abroad in the company of his father who was in the diplomatic service, and received the humanistic education fashionable in his day. He served in the papal diplomatic corps and became a cardinal in 1539. An accomplished Latinist, Bembo chose to write in the Florentine vernacular accessible to a wide lay readership. On the use of Latin, he argued that contemporary writers should go back to the Latin of Cicero and Virgil. In the Prose della volgar lingua (Prose writings in the vulgar language, 1525) he argued that the standard for the use of Italian was set by the major writers of the 14th century, particularly by GIOVANNI BOCCACCIO in prose and PETRARCH in verse. Bembo called their noble and inspiring language the volgare. That designation, not meant to be denigrating, has been in use ever since. The linguistic criteria adopted by Bembo, covering such matters as grammar, spelling, and syntax, later became the basis of the first vocabulary of the Italian language published by the Accademia della Crusca in 1612. Bembo’s contributions to the development of the Italian language illustrate the decisive role played by the literati is shaping the official language, which has always differed substantially from the everyday language of ordinary Italians. Bembo’s theories were hotly debated in his day, but prevailed nevertheless due in no small measure to his personal charm and the gracefulness and elegance of his writings.

Benedict XIV (1675–1758) pope (1740–1758) Cardinal Prospero Lambertini came to the papacy the long way. He was 65 when elected

and it took the College of Cardinals five months to pick him. Admired in his own time for his intellect, scholarly accomplishments, openness to new ideas, and genial disposition, Benedict stands out as one of the great popes of the ENLIGHTENMENT. In religious matters he simplified ritual, reduced feast days, acknowledged the legitimacy of Eastern Christian rites in communion with Rome, and urged caution in placing books on the INDEX. Perhaps his greatest challenge came in dealing with Catholic governments determined to challenge and curb the power of the church. He responded with skillful diplomacy, steering a middle course between critics and supporters, to ward off the more serious threats to papal power. He turned Rome into an artistic and intellectual center, founded new schools, established chairs for the study of science, mathematics, and medicine, and expanded the Vatican Library and archives. Renowned artists and scholars came to Rome from all parts of Europe to study and work. Benedict XIV exemplifies the papacy’s identification with the culture of the Enlightenment before the onset of revolution and the conclusion of later popes that Enlightenment culture and Christianity were not compatible.

Benedict XV (1854–1922) pope (1914–1922) Born Giacomo Della Chiesa in Genoa to a family of the aristocracy, his surname (Of the Church) proved prophetic. He was ordained in 1878 and entered on a career in the Vatican’s diplomatic corps, holding various posts in Rome and abroad. In 1907 he was named archbishop of Bologna and made a cardinal in 1914. He was elected pope in September of that same year. Given the timing of his election, WORLD WAR I was the most urgent issue of his papacy. He opposed Italy’s intervention in the war and condemned the diplomatic negotiations preceding it, which excluded the Vatican from participation in any future peace settlement. The war itself he

148 Beneduce, Alberto

denounced as a crime against God and humanity. Benedict pursued a neutral stance, committed to seeking a peaceful solution that would enable him to mediate the conflict. However, his overtures were rebuffed as each side suspected him of secretly siding with the other. A detailed proposal of August 1917 called for a negotiated peace, freedom of the seas, no territorial gains, gradual disarmament, and an international tribunal for the peaceful settlement of international disputes. It was similar in many respects to President Woodrow Wilson’s celebrated Fourteen Points, but received scant attention from governments. Benedict condemned the Treaty of Versailles as punitive and a cause of future wars. In Italian politics he took steps to stem the threat of communism and encouraged the formation of the Italian Popular Party (PPI) to mobilize the Catholic vote. By the time of Benedict’s death in January 1922 the Popular Party had become the second-largest party in the country.

Beneduce, Alberto (1877–1944) financial expert and public administrator Beneduce, a statistician, demographer, agricultural and insurance expert, as well as a teacher, business manager, and public servant, was a pivotal figure in business and government in the first four decades of the 20th century. It complicates matters that he was also a socialist dedicated enough to name his daughter Idea Socialista (she later married the banker ENRICO CUCCIA), was well connected in the world of high finance, and collaborated with the Fascist regime. In 1914 he called for Italian intervention in the war and volunteered for military service. After the war he served as minister of labor in the government headed by the social democrat IVANOE BONOMI (1921–22). Initially opposed to fascism, he came on board after 1925 when the regime abandoned laissez-faire policies in favor of economic interventionism. GIUSEPPE VOLPI, the new minister of finances, made way for him in business and government because he valued Beneduce’s expertise. BENITO MUSSOLINI, also impressed by Beneduce’s

competence and loyalty, relied on him for advice in the campaign to revalue the CURRENCY. In 1933 Mussolini appointed Beneduce head of the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (IRI), and Beneduce used his power to put private banks and industrial firms under government control. In this roundabout fashion, he realized the socialist goal of expanding government control of the economy. Made senator in 1939, the next year he resigned all his public offices because of poor health, but retained his important positions on the boards of private businesses. Often overlooked because of his deliberately low-key public personality, Beneduce was the real duce of the 20th-century Italian economy.

Benetton Headquartered in the northern city of Treviso, Benetton exemplifies the typically Italian transition from small family enterprise to global conglomerate. Luciano Benetton, the company’s founder, started out as a shop assistant, sold his bicycle to buy a sewing machine, went into business (1955), and sold sweaters knitted by his sisters. Eventually he hit upon a winning idea, manufacturing pastel-colored sweaters, marketing them in carefully selected locations in shops bearing the Benetton name, and cultivating a youthful, sporting image for the merchandise. Benetton shops are actually owned by independent retailers who have contracted to buy directly from Benetton and who are solely responsible for selling the merchandise. Benetton does little manufacturing of its own, mostly contracting out to local suppliers. A network of agents oversees the apparel chain, checking for quality and monitoring the operations of outlets. The system has the advantage of maximizing profits on a relatively small investment of capital. The Benetton image is something of a cross between trendy boutique and large-scale producer. The apparel line has lost some of its appeal in recent years, prompting the family to diversify into unrelated areas of business, including telecommunications and the operation of toll roads. Benetton’s success

Berio, Luciano 149

in the apparel line has reinforced Italy’s image as a fashion and design leader.

Bentinck, William (1774–1839) (Lord William H. Cavendish Bentinck) British diplomat and adviser to the Bourbon monarchy in Sicily, governor-general of India Lord William Bentinck arrived in Sicily as British envoy in July 1811. The court of FERDINAND IV had settled in Palermo after being driven from the mainland by the French armies of NAPOLEON I. Bentinck, who had previously served as military commander and governor in India, was a blunt, soldierly type who did not hesitate to pressure the king and his entourage into adopting policies deemed desirable by the British. Bentinck, a Whig, was very much in favor of limited, constitutional monarchy. It was at Bentinck’s insistence that Ferdinand issued the so-called Sicilian constitution of 1812, which provided for an elected legislature with the power to tax, gave voting rights to the wealthy, and abolished feudal privileges dear to the nobility. The constitution appealed to the liberal nobility of the island, but was resented by the court and the conservative nobility. Its acceptance changed the nature of the anti-Napoleonic struggle from conservative reaction to liberal reform. Bentinck also seems to have entertained the possibility that Sicily could become a British possession. Nevertheless, his reforms encouraged Italian patriots to expect some form of Italian independence from the British. They were soon disillusioned. The conservative British government removed Bentinck from Sicily in July 1814, disavowed his liberal policies, and acquiesced to Austrian dominance in Italy. In 1816 Ferdinand IV abolished the Sicilian constitution and made Sicily a province of the KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES. The Sicilian constitution of 1812 was a model for moderate liberals in the RISORGIMENTO.

Bentivoglio family See BOLOGNA.

Berchet, Giovanni (1783–1851) poet, patriot, and political exile Berchet was born in Milan to a family of FrenchSwiss origin. Love of literature did not mix easily with his duties as a government clerk and he soon gave up the security of steady employment. Familiar with European writers, he translated into Italian modern British and German authors of the romantic school. His pamphlet entitled Semiserious Letter by Chrysosthom to his Son (1816) urged readers to pay attention to what was happening abroad in order to renew Italian culture, in the good-humored tone of a father giving advice to a son. Berchet saw Italy as part of the European cultural mainstream, but he also argued for the distinctive character of Italian culture within the framework of European letters. He did not limit himself to writing, but also took part in political conspiracies, and fled abroad after the REVOLUTION of 1821 to avoid arrest. He lived seven years in London working as a bank clerk and writing the romantic verses that gave him fame as a writer and patriot. During the revolutions of 1848 Berchet was a member of the provisional government of Lombardy and supported union with the KINGDOM OF SARDINIA. He found refuge in Piedmont after the revolution and served briefly in the Piedmontese parliament. Hardly read today and all but forgotten by literary critics, Berchet was an important figure in his time.

Berio, Luciano (1925–2003) prolific and innovative avant-garde composer Born in the Ligurian coastal town of Oneglia to a family of professional musicians, Berio studied music at the Milan Conservatory (1945–50). His fellow students included the American soprano Cathy Berberian, whom he married in 1950, and who influenced him to adopt modernist idioms. Berio quickly made a name for himself as an innovative composer open to new ideas. In the 1950s he pioneered in the use of electronic instruments and experimented with 12-tone music. His first composition for the stage was

150 Berlinguer, Enrico

Passaggio (1963), which premiered at the Piccola Scala of Milan. Its expression of the social pressures at work on its sole female character was indicative of the political tone of Berio’s early works. His later works lost much of their political immediacy and were more introspective and lyrical. His musical idiom is a synthesis of the contemporary and the traditional, showing the influence of composers as different as CLAUDIO MONTEVERDI, GIUSEPPE VERDI, and Igor Stravinsky. In addition to instrumental music, Berio also wrote for the voice on texts by contemporary authors such as UMBERTO ECO. He traveled and worked extensively abroad, including the United States, where he lived for many years. He taught at Tanglewood and the Julliard School, where he founded the Julliard Ensemble and took up conducting. He returned to Italy in 1972 and established his own school of music in Florence in 1980. On television and in concerts, he has tried to interest popular audiences in contemporary music. Perhaps the best example of his style is the five-movement work for orchestra and voices entitled Sinfonia (1967–68). With an international following among devotees of avantgarde music, Berio is regarded as Italy’s major postwar composer.

Berlinguer, Enrico (1922–1984) Communist Party leader and reformer Berlinguer, descended from a family of the Sardinian nobility, rose through the ranks of the Italian Communist Party (PCI) after joining its youth section in 1943. In 1945 he became a member of the party’s central committee and was elected to parliament in 1968. He succeeded LUIGI LONGO as general secretary of the party in 1972 and held that top post until his death. He steered the party through a particularly difficult period marked by political terrorism, labor unrest, and a changing international situation. Domestically, he pursued the HISTORIC COMPROMISE with the dominant Christian Democratic Party (DC), distanced his party from extra-parliamentary and terrorist groups, reaffirmed the

party’s commitment to parliamentary democracy, and sought to contain labor unrest. Internationally, he broke with the Soviet Union by embracing EUROCOMMUNISM, favoring European economic integration, and accepting NATO. In the late 1970s, following the assassination of ALDO MORO, faced by public rejection of TERRORISM and electoral losses for his party, he adopted a more confrontational attitude toward the Christian Democrats, which effectively ended the historic compromise. Berlinguer was widely respected for his personal and political integrity, but his policies were controversial within and outside his party, none more so than the strategy of sharing power with the Christian Democrats.

Berlusconi, Silvio (1936–

)

media tycoon and political leader Born in Milan, the son of a bank employee, Berlusconi attended Catholic schools and earned a law degree from the University of Milan. His enterprising spirit manifested itself when he helped pay his way through college by performing as a crooner on cruise ships. Business talent and good timing earned him a fortune in real estate deals in the 1960s. He took advantage of state deregulation of the television industry in the 1970s to develop a network of private stations that today controls about 80 percent of the commercial market. His vast fortune, estimated at about $12 billion in 2001, also rests on ownership or control of a vast media empire that includes newspapers, magazines, advertising agencies, and the AC Milan soccer team. He turned to politics in the 1980s as a political protégé of Socialist Party leader BETTINO CRAXI, but, in addition to his media empire, his rise was also aided by the political scandals of the early 1990s that ended Craxi’s career and brought down the old political establishment. In 1993 Berlusconi launched his own political party, named FORZA ITALIA. In 1994 he headed a short-lived coalition government that collapsed after only seven months in power. Berlusconi then headed the parliamentary opposition to the center-left gov-

Bernini, Gian Lorenzo 151

ernments. In the elections of May 2001 he campaigned largely on his image as a “can-do” businessman, promised to eliminate waste and corruption in government, modernize public services, fight crime, curb illegal immigration, and give the country greater international visibility and a stronger role in NATO and the EUROPEAN UNION. He capitalized on his image as a political outsider. His inventive campaign ploys included signing a formal contract with the voters to deliver on his promises and mailing a glossy biography of himself to millions of households. His image apparently appealed particularly to a younger generation of middle-class voters attracted by the promises of economic progress and prosperity, and motivated by a patriotic fervor similar to the enthusiasm of sport fans for their favorite team. The second coalition government that he formed in June 2001 has been much more durable than the first. Berlusconi shows amazing resilience in the face of attacks that would doom less resourceful politicians. He faces opposition for his pro-business policies, strong identification with American foreign policies, attempts to cut government spending, particularly in the sensitive area of pension benefits, and in the courts for alleged bribery of public officials by him or his subordinates in business. His second government was still in power in April 2004.

Berni, Francesco (1497–1545) writer Born in Tuscany, Berni is remembered as the writer of witty, satirical verse written in Roman dialect. His association with Rome came from his years in the service of prelates in that city. Berni’s verse appealed to the contemporary taste for the paradoxical use of highly polished language that praised the unexpected or cast ridicule on prominent people and events. Berni’s language was down to earth, often to the point of vulgarity and indecency. The realism of his writings contrasts with the lyricism traceable to the influence of PETRARCH. Because of that con-

trast, Berni is seen as representing the anti-lyrical and antisentimental strain of the Italian literary tradition. His reworking of Matteo Maria Boiardo’s unfinished epic poem Orlando innammorato was even more popular than the original. Berni dubbed his own style of writing poesia bernesca, and the label has been applied to a vast body of 16th- and 17th-century burlesque literature that satirizes ideals and idealists. He did not live without risk, and may have died poisoned by a victim of his wit.

Bernini, Gian Lorenzo (1598–1680) sculptor, architect, and painter The leading artist of the Italian BAROQUE was born in Naples, the son of a Florentine father who was also a sculptor and a Neapolitan mother. Contemporaries remarked that his art combined the meticulous craftsmanship of Tuscany with the love of gesture and emotionality of Naples. His artistic talent manifested itself early in life. His earliest surviving sculptures, from around 1615, showing the influence of ancient Greek and Roman models, reveal his ability to render the human body with anatomical precision while also imparting to his figures a sense of motion and emotional dynamism. Gesture, passion, and emotional intensity were the dominant traits of his mature art, which strives to make a strong impression, and to capture and hold the attention of the viewer. Bernini worked in Rome for most of his life. There, his talent can be admired in the design of churches, fountains, statues, and public monuments. His patrons included the BORGHESE FAMILY and several popes. Among his more notable works are the Cathedra Petri, which enshrines Saint Peter’s seat inside Saint Peter’s Basilica, and the colonnade embracing Saint Peter’s Square. Perhaps his best-known and most discussed statue is the Ecstasy of Saint Teresa in the Church of Santa Maria della Vittoria. The Triton Fountain in Piazza Barberini and the Fountain of the Four Rivers in Piazza Navona are his most celebrated outdoor compositions. Bernini is

152 Bertani, Agostino

noted for his successful integration of sculpture and architecture. As the papacy’s official artist, his influence was felt throughout the Catholic world, making him the most ubiquitous and influential figure of the baroque style. Celebrated as an unparalleled genius in his lifetime, his reputation suffered at the hands of later critics, including classicists and contemporary functionalists who object to the rhetorical, extroverted character of his works.

Bertani, Agostino (1812–1886) leader of the radical opposition before and after national unification This energetic and tireless RISORGIMENTO figure was born to a prominent Milanese family, practiced medicine and surgery, and was irresistibly drawn to politics. After traveling abroad to perfect his medical skills, Bertani fought on the barricades during the Five Days of Milan in the REVOLUTIONS of 1848. When the revolution was suppressed in Milan Bertani moved on to organize medical services for the revolutionaries in Rome. A convinced republican, Bertani formed a strong attachment to GIUSEPPE MAZZINI. Throughout the 1850s, while Mazzini was in London, Bertani organized support for him in Genoa and founded sharpshooting clubs to train patriots for war. In 1859 he organized medical assistance for the volunteers fighting for GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI. He also joined Garibaldi’s expedition to Sicily in 1860, when he favored prolonging the military campaign to take Rome from the pope. In the national parliament (1860–80, 1880–82) he was a vocal critic of both the HISTORICAL RIGHT and the LIBERAL LEFT. During the campaign against BRIGANDAGE in the South, Bertani criticized the government and the army for the use of arbitrary and excessive force. At his insistence the government began an investigation of the living conditions of workers and peasants tied to the investigation headed by STEFANO JACINI into the conditions of agriculture. Bertani carried on his opposition in the halls of parliament, condemned recourse to political violence, and rejected social-

ism, which he saw as a threat to the state and national unity.

Bertolucci, Bernardo (1940–

)

film director and screenwriter Bertolucci was born in Parma to a family that encouraged the boy’s artistic interests. His father was a poet, film critic, and art history professor. The son started out as a writer with the publication of In cerca di mistero (In search of mystery, 1960), a book of poetry. His career in film began while he attended the University of Rome (1958–61) as assistant director to PIER PAOLO PASOLINI. Bertolucci left the university without graduating to pursue filmmaking independently. His first successful feature film, Prima della rivoluzione (Before the revolution, 1964), inspired by Stendhal’s novel The Charterhouse of Parma, displayed the distinguishing characteristics of his style: sensitivity to personal drama and psychological tension, portrayed against a broad social canvas that adds poignancy and historical significance to the personal situations of his characters. His work suggests an intellectual debt to Italy’s operatic tradition and to the more recent and fashionable influences of Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx. After a pause of six years attributable to fund-raising difficulties, Bertolucci produced La strategia del ragno (The spider’s strategy, 1970). This film, inspired by a short story by Jorge Luis Borges, traces a son’s investigation of his father’s murder by Fascists, expecting to find out about his father’s anti-Fascist past, only to discover that his father had been a Fascist informer executed by his own friends to preserve his good name as an anti-Fascist. Il conformista (The conformist, 1971), based on the novel by ALBERTO MORAVIA, is regarded as Bertolucci’s masterpiece. Set against the backdrop of Fascist Italy, it tells the story of a young man from a wealthy family who goes along with fascism to hide his own sense of insecurity and resolve his own personal conflicts. Ultimo tango a Parigi (Last tango in Paris, 1972), Bertolucci’s most controversial film, is often denounced as obscene because of its depiction of

Bianco di Saint-Jorioz, Count Carlo 153

sexual politics. Its tremendous success worldwide established Bertolucci as a major cinematic presence and gave him freedom to pursue projects of his own liking at a leisurely pace. Novecento (1900, 1976) was an almost six-hour-long epic that resorts to Freudian and Marxist insights to illuminate the transition from liberalism to fascism and ends in 1945 with the triumph of socialism in Bertolucci’s Po Valley. Bertolucci again captured worldwide attention wth the filming of The Last Emperor (1987), his last major success. The winner of many Academy Awards, this film tells the story of the last Chinese emperor Pu Yi, who began as a child ruler and ended his life working as a gardener in communist China. Bertolucci’s career connects the Italian postwar cinematic tradition, with its focus on the personal, intimate, and small-scale, with the American and international preference for the epic, grandiose spectacle, and striking visual effects.

Betti, Ugo (1892–1953) playwright Betti’s reputation as a writer rests on his works for the stage. As a dramatist, he can be ranked next to LUIGI PIRANDELLO. Betti was born in the university town of Camerino, studied law, and began writing in his spare time in the 1920s while pursuing a career as a judge. He wrote steadily and his plays were performed in the 1930s; he received prizes for his work, and showed no discernible political inclinations. He was one of many artists who found it possible to express himself and pursue his intellectual interests within the fairly broad parameters of artistic license allowed by the Fascist regime. A strong moralistic tone pervades his plays, in which characters wrestle with questions of conscience. It has been suggested that his experiences on the bench made him aware of the complexities of human relationships and account for his concern with issues of individual responsibility, guilt, and atonement. Such concerns also reflect his ongoing consideration of religion and the attendant issues of free will, forgiveness, and

redemption. Betti’s reputation as a dramatist rose appreciably after WORLD WAR II. In the climate of Christian Democracy that prevailed after 1945, Betti openly embraced Catholicism and the church. Italian critics have tended to ignore or minimize Betti’s work. He is better known and appreciated in the Anglo-Saxon world, where his moralizing tendencies strike a chord with audiences. Several of his 27 plays have been translated into English.

Bianchi, Michele See FASCISM. Bianco di Saint-Jorioz, Count Carlo (1795–1843) military writer and political conspirator Born to a noble family of Piedmont, orphaned at an early age, Bianco studied law at the University of Turin, then pursued a military career, rising to the rank of captain in the elite regiment of the king’s dragoons. His republican sentiments drew him toward the SECRET SOCIETIES that rose in Piedmont after 1815. Compromised by his role in the REVOLUTION of 1821, he escaped to Spain, where he fought for the liberal cause in the 1820s, then found refuge in Gibraltar, Greece, and MALTA. In Malta he wrote and published his treatise Della guerra nazionale d’insurrezione per bande (On the national war of insurrection by bands, 1828), which became a classic text for conspirators in the European underground. Regarded as a fundamental text of guerrilla warfare, Bianco’s book explained how the tactics of irregular warfare could defeat regular armies. Political assassination, physical intimidation, acts of terrorism and sabotage like the poisoning of water supplies, and hit-and-run raids against designated targets were among the tactics that Bianco considered legitimate in wars of national liberation. In 1831 Bianco linked up with GIUSEPPE MAZZINI and FILIPPO MICHELE BUONARROTI. Both expected that Bianco, as head of the secret military society of the Apofasimeni (Those Who Have Vowed to Die), would recruit

154 Biblioteca Italiana (La)

and train conspirators for their respective projects of insurrection. But Bianco was better as a theoretician than as an organizer or field commander. Bianco committed suicide and very little came of his efforts in the short run. But his ideas lived on in the Italian revolutionary tradition. His conceptualization of “war by bands” had an impact on Mazzini, CARLO PISACANE, ANARCHISM, and 20th-century terrorist groups like the RED BRIGADES.

Biblioteca Italiana (La) See JOURNALISM. Binda, Alfredo See SPORT. birth control Italian birthrates, once among the highest in Europe, have declined steadily since the mid19th century. That decline suggests that Italians have practiced birth control regardless of religious injunctions and public controversy. The decline has affected all parts of the country, but national averages do obscure significant regional variations. Birthrates remain higher in the South than in the North and rural families tend to be larger than urban families. Still, the gap in birthrates between North and South, between urban and rural, and between the middle and working classes is closing. Families of small landowners have long had the lowest birthrates. Surveys indicate that lacking easy access to contraceptives, Italian couples have limited the number of children by other means. The campaign to legalize the sale and distribution of contraceptives and introduce sex education in the schools encountered the opposition of the CATHOLIC CHURCH. It should also be pointed out that the pro-natal policies of the Fascist regime left behind legislation that banned the sale and distribution of contraceptives. After 1945, governments dominated by the Christian Democratic Party (DC) generally adhered to church policy on birth control and sex education. Opposition to

restrictions on birth control came from the parties of the Left and their subsidiary organizations. The Unione Donne Italiane (UDI) and other feminist organizations campaigned vigorously for lifting restrictions. The sale of contraceptives and dissemination of birth control information were legalized in 1971. Legislation providing for family-planning clinics passed in 1975. The battle to legalize and facilitate birth control intersects historically and ideologically with the concurrent struggle to legalize ABORTION. Individual choices, social trends, and legislative policies have given Italy one of the lowest birth rates in the world. In 1995–2000 the population grew by less than 1 percent; in 2002 women had a fertility rate of only 1.2, and the crude birthrate stood at 8.5 per 1,000 (lower than the death rate of 10.3 per 1,000). At the start of the 21st century Italy faces the prospects of a rapidly aging population and population decline.

Bissolati, Leonida (1857–1920) moderate socialist, journalist, and government minister A founding member of the Italian Socialist Party (PSI), Bissolati made his political debut as a republican after completing law studies at the University of Bologna. His interest in social problems drew him to socialism as an organizer of agricultural workers and journalists. From 1896 to 1903, and again from 1908 to 1910, he was editor in chief of the party newspaper Avanti!. From his first election to parliament in 1897, Bissolati worked to win more electoral support for the party and greater leverage in parliament. The revolutionary wing of the party, and even many moderates, opposed his policy of collaboration with Prime Minister GIOVANNI GIOLITTI. His support of the government’s foreign policy and his vote in favor of military spending for the ITALIANTURKISH WAR further isolated him. Expelled from the Socialist Party in 1912, Bissolati founded the Socialist Reformist Party, which won little voter support. Bissolati at first favored Italian neutral-

Blasetti, Alessandro 155

ity in WORLD WAR I, then opted for Italian intervention on the side of England and France. At age 57 he volunteered for military duty, served on the frontline, and was wounded. In 1917 he became minister for military affairs in the government of national unity headed by PAOLO BOSELLI. Bissolati favored a policy of friendly relations with the Slavic nationalities of the former Austrian Empire and opposed the annexation of ethnic minorities. Differences with the government on these and other issues led to his resignation as minister for military affairs in December 1918. In the politically surcharged atmosphere of the postwar years, Bissolati became a highly controversial figure reviled by extremists of the Left and Right. BENITO MUSSOLINI cast him in the role of national villain, although he made partial amends after Bissolati’s death. Bissolati was a voice of reason and moderation that was drowned out by raging political passions.

Bixio, Gerolamo (1821–1873) (Nino) conspirator in the fight for national unification, political and military figure This Genoese patriot, an adventurous daredevil to an extreme, loved the sea and military combat in about equal measure. Born to a family of liberal sentiments, he sailed at an early age, enrolled in the Sardinian navy, and left it to roam the Indian Ocean, eventually finding his way back to Genoa by sailing around the world. An active conspirator, he organized republican elements in Genoa in the 1840s. In the REVOLUTION of 1848 he fought with GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI and was seriously wounded in Rome in 1849. He went back to the sea in the 1850s, fought again with Garibaldi in 1859, and played a major role at his side in the Sicilian campaign of 1860 as second in command, and was again wounded in combat. Admitted to the regular army, he rose to the rank of general. He commanded troops in 1866 against Austria and in the taking of Rome in 1870. Bixio, an irascible and intemperate

commander, often acted impetuously, offended many, and stood in awe only of Garibaldi. He showed a more moderate side of his personality as a member of the first Italian parliament after 1860 when he tried to mediate the conflict between Garibaldi and CAVOUR and reconcile moderates and democrats. He was appointed senator in 1870, but impatient with political maneuverings and unsuccessful in business, he returned to life on the sea. In 1872 he sailed with his own ship to the Indian Ocean in search of opportunities for Italian commercial expansion. It was his last adventure. He died in Malaysia, the victim of a cholera epidemic.

Black Shirts See FASCISM. Blasetti, Alessandro (1900–1987) film critic and director The most innovative and successful film director of the Fascist period was born in Rome, received a law degree, but turned his attention to the new field of film criticism. From the columns of Cinematografo, the review that he founded in 1926, Blasetti called for revitalizing the Italian film industry, which had declined from its prewar position of eminence. Starting with the film Sole (Sun, 1929), now almost entirely lost, he began to treat topical themes approved by the regime in a true-to-life style that critics say anticipated postwar cinematic NEOREALISM. Sole presented one of the regime’s proudest achievements, the draining of the Pontine marshes, as a victory of willpower over the forces of inertia. In Terra madre (Mother Earth, 1930), Blasetti made peasants the heroes of his story, glorified life on the land, and presented urban life as corrupting and enervating. In 1860 (1932), Blasetti tackled the story of Italian unification from the perspective of a Sicilian peasant couple (played by real peasants) who expect social justice from the movement for national unification. Vecchia guardia (The old guard, 1934) idealized Fascists “of the first hour” who had taken to the streets to save

156 Boccaccio, Giovanni

the country from communism. With the exception of Vecchia guardia, Blasetti did not trumpet the messages of Fascist propaganda. His seems to have been more a case of spontaneous identification with the regime. His films were all the more effective, and undeniably popular, for their understated manner and the documentary filming techniques. Blasetti’s style began to change in the late 1930s when his films turned to look at the historical past, employed costumed actors in baroque settings, and strove for spectacular effects. He survived the fall of the Fascist regime and continued to make films that had some commercial success. Europa di notte (Europe by night, 1958) and Io amo, tu ami (I love, you love, 1961), catered to the erotic interests of audiences, using fiction to look at sexual mores.

Boccaccio, Giovanni (1313–1375) writer and scholar, precursor of humanist culture The writer who is acknowledged as the father of Italian prose was born either in Florence or Certaldo. He was the illegitimate son of a merchant who acknowledged his paternity, accepted him into the family, and trained him for a career in trade and banking. In 1327 the young Boccaccio accompanied his father to Naples and worked there with him for the next 13 years. The son’s literary vocation and scholarly interests manifested themselves fully during the years of his adolescence in Naples, as did his youthful exuberance, pursuit of worldly pleasures, and social ambitions. Boccaccio was accepted in court circles and hobnobbed with the city’s young aristocrats. Fiammetta, the young woman with whom he fell in love and who appears idealized in several of his writings, may have been the illegitimate daughter of Naples’s King Robert (1309–43). His familiarity with merchants and aristocrats may explain Boccaccio’s admiration for the feudal concept of honor and merchantlike concern for the concrete and palpable. The tension between commercial endeavor and gentlemanly detachment manifests itself in many of

his writings. His most important work of the Neapolitan period is the long prose narrative entitled the Filocolo (1336–38). It tells the story of the young prince Florio and his impoverished sweetheart Biancifiore. In love since childhood, they are separated and eventually reunited. The story narrates Florio’s long and trying quest for his lost love, their reunion, conversion to Christianity, and marriage. The conventional plot, clearly derived from medieval sources, is enlivened by episodes and description that ring true to life. The story shows Boccaccio’s talent for storytelling and for depicting places, passions, and incidents with an eye for their diversity and uniqueness. Boccaccio’s return to Florence in 1341 opened a less happy period of his life. Civil strife, war, and economic crisis threatened the city. Florence nevertheless provided him with many opportunities to mingle with learned scholars and creative artists. The most important and lasting connection of his Florentine years was with the poet PETRARCH, whom Boccaccio admired above all his contemporaries. Inspiration also came to him from two other figures of the recent past, Giotto and DANTE. Giotto he admired for the realism of his figures and Dante for his pursuit of eternal ideals. The outbreak of the plague in 1348 compounded Florence’s problems (in two years the epidemic carried off about twothirds of the population). It also provided Boccaccio with the occasion to write the masterpiece of his life. The Decameron, written around 1350, imagines a group of 10 young men and women who take refuge in the countryside to escape the epidemic. To pass away the time, they take turns telling tales. The book’s 100 tales range far and wide in tone and topic. The influence of traditional chivalric literature is evident, but the tone is strikingly new. Human vices and the pleasures of the flesh are abundantly depicted, but so are bravery and generosity. The stories illustrate the acquisitive ethic of the merchant class, the innocence of youth, the egoism of old age, the corruption of the clergy, and the chivalric code of the aristocracy.

Boccioni, Umberto 157

His contemporaries did not immediately appreciate Boccaccio’s versatility and genius. They tended rather to condemn the bawdiness of the tales, the irreverence, and the apparent refusal to pass judgment on immoral behavior. A closer reading might have revealed embedded in the very structure of the book the same striving for eternal truth that Boccaccio admired in Dante. It was for later generations of readers to appreciate the Decameron’s originality, its rich gallery of characters, and its thoroughly secular spirit. In that sense, Boccaccio can be seen as a major precursor and inspirer of the culture of HUMANISM. His influence reached far and wide, as evident in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. In his final years, grossly overweight and infirm, Boccaccio sought peace and solitude in Certaldo. He left his ancestral town reluctantly, when the Florentine government entrusted him with some mission. By putting his experience and learning at the service of the state, Boccaccio exemplified another characteristic of humanism: the ideal of the informed citizen active in the public arena.

Bocchini, Arturo (1880–1940) Fascist chief of police While keeping a low public profile as chief of police (1926–40), Bocchini was largely responsible for creating and operating the repressive apparatus of the Fascist regime. Born in the southern province of Benevento, he graduated from the University of Naples in 1902 with a law degree, and took on an entry-level position in the interior ministry the following year. He moved gradually and methodically up the ladder, gaining complete mastery of the administration, until BENITO MUSSOLINI appointed him chief of police in September 1926. The choice reflected Mussolini’s preference for dealing with functionaries rather than party zealots. Bocchini’s appointment coincided with the reorganization of the state that came in the wake of the MATTEOTTI crisis. Bocchini provided better training and pay for police officers, introduced uniform criteria for appointment and advancement,

and coordinated the activities of the various security services. He took full advantage of the laws that expanded the powers of the police, assuring Mussolini the complete loyalty of the forces, organizing a nationwide system of informers, nipping political opposition in the bud with preventive arrests, and reporting directly to Mussolini on a daily basis. Such access to the ultimate source of authority inevitably aroused opposition from party figures who obstructed and criticized him, to little effect. Mussolini relied on information received from Bocchini to gauge the state of public opinion. Bocchini kept the Duce’s confidence by observing his general directives and telling him what he thought he wanted to hear. When he disagreed with policy decisions, as he apparently did in the case of anti-Semitic legislation, he did not question them in principle, but did what he could to delay or dilute their application. He died unexpectedly in office in November 1940 after having put the police on a war footing. Bocchini made discreet use of police powers, but ubiquitous informers, preventive measures, and frequent arrests created a climate of intimidation that frightened people into political acquiescence. The popular consensus behind the regime owed much to Bocchini’s discreet and efficient use of police powers.

Boccioni, Umberto (1882–1916) futurist painter and sculptor The son of a civil servant, Boccioni was born in Reggio Emilia but moved frequently as a child as his father was posted to different places. In 1897 he graduated from a technical school in Catania, moved to Rome in 1901, and began his artistic career painting commercial posters. In 1906 he visited Paris and traveled to Russia. In 1907 he settled in Milan, where he met FILIPPO TOMMASO MARINETTI, the founder of the futurist movement. Like all futurists, Boccioni wanted to break decisively with tradition, but stood out for his exceptionally innovative techniques and for his ability to articulate the intentions of the cultural revolution of FUTURISM. The new art was to

158 Bodio, Luigi

be dynamic, reflecting the restlessness of the machine age and the excitement of industrial society. His essays on painting and sculpture became basic texts of the new art, while his works conveyed the excitement of experimentation. Objects were barely recognizable, shapes became all important, tumultuous movement and blurring of lines and colors dominated the canvases. Boccioni welcomed the advent of war in 1914, campaigned for Italy’s participation in the conflict, and volunteered for military service in May 1915 when Italy went to war. He died in the army, the victim of a horse-riding accident.

1860 when it became part of the kingdom of Italy. Its diversified and prosperous economy combines agriculture, industry, commerce, and tourism. Small and medium-sized firms dominate the industrial sector, producing shoes, textiles, chemicals, and food products. Bologna is renowned for its rich cuisine, which has earned it the name, Bologna la Grassa (Bologna the Fat). Considered a model city for the efficiency and comprehensiveness of its public services, it was the boast of the Italian Communist Party (PCI) that administered it for many decades after 1945.

Bodio, Luigi See STATISTICS.

Bonaparte, Joseph (1768–1844)

Boiardo, Matteo See ARIOSTO, LUDOVICO; PANIZZI, ANTONIO.

Boito, Arrigo See SCAPIGLIATURA. Bologna, city of Bologna (pop. 381,000), the capital city of the EMILIA-ROMAGNA region, lies in the Po Valley at the foot of the APENNINES. The Etruscans founded it in the sixth century B.C. and called it Felsina. Gauls took it over two centuries later, and then came the Romans who called it Bonomia. Byzantines, Lombards, and Franks ruled it successively after the collapse of Roman administration in the fifth century. The founding of its famous university, the oldest in Europe, around 1088 made the city an international center of learning, a distinction that it still retains. Bologna was one of the first cities to be organized as an independent commune in 1144. In the following centuries the town was torn by the factional conflicts between Guelfs and Ghibellines that afflicted most Italian cities. Ruled intermittently by the Bentivoglio family from 1401 to 1512, it became part of the PAPAL STATES in the 16th century. The city remained under papal rule until

king of Naples (1806–1808) and Spain (1808–1813) Accepting the crowns of Naples and Spain to please his younger brother NAPOLEON I, Joseph (Giuseppe) had little of his brother’s enthusiasm for military glory. Handsome, charming, intellectually alive, and receptive to new ideas, Joseph was easygoing and of moderate temperament. Napoleon relied on him because he was genuinely fond of his brother and knew that he could trust him. He made Joseph king of Naples, expecting no military help from the Neapolitans but wanting to use the southern Italian kingdom as a source of revenue and as a base for his Mediterranean policy. Joseph had studied at the University of Pisa, knew Italy well, and governed more independently than his brother expected. He organized the government with ministries along French lines, abolished feudalism, shut down religious organizations that performed no useful social function, reorganized government finances, improved the collection of taxes, reduced the public debt, and introduced military conscription. Implementation of these reforms was slow and gradual because Joseph did not want to alarm the powerful nobility and clergy. The nobility were to be fully compensated for the loss of feudal rights and would retain ownership of most of the land. Many religious communities were spared, Neapolitans were appointed to important posi-

Bonghi, Ruggero 159

tions in the government, and military conscription was light. Joseph also resisted his brother’s exorbitant demands for money. He resented the restrictions that the Continental System placed on free trade, did what he could to enforce the system, but was unable to stop contraband and illicit trade. Joseph ruled by decree without a parliament, but shortly before becoming king of Spain in 1808 he issued a constitution that provided for limited representation. JOACHIM MURAT, Joseph’s successor in Naples, showed more interested in military matters than government administration. Joseph’s policies were popular with some reformminded members of the aristocracy and middle classes. Later in the 19th century, the policies of Joseph and Murat became reference points for moderate liberals who wanted change without revolution.

French rule. The young Napoleon was able to attend the French military academy at Saint-Cyr thanks to a scholarship that the French government made available to impoverished members of the nobility. Joseph became king of Naples, ELISA (who married FELICE BACIOCCHI) was princess of Lucca and Tuscany. The Bonapartes were active in Italian affairs in the 19th century after the defeat of Napoleon, including Carlo Luciano, prince of Canino (1803–57), a son of Lucien, who sided with the revolutionaries in Venice and Rome in 1848–49, Napoleon Joseph, nicknamed Plon-Plon (1822–91), son of Jerome, who married the daughter of King VICTOR EMMANUEL II, and Louis Napoleon, the future NAPOLEON III, who was a political conspirator in Italy in the 1830s.

Bonghi, Ruggero (1826–1895) Bonaparte, Napoleon See NAPOLEON I. Bonaparte family (Buonaparte family) The precise place of origin of the Bonaparte (or Buonaparte) family is unclear, but in all likelihood they migrated from Tuscany or Liguria to Corsica in the 16th century, settling in the capital city of Ajaccio. A family of some influence, they received patents of nobility from the grand duke of Tuscany in 1757 and 1759. For a time, family members sported their noble status by signing themselves de Buonaparte. Carlo Bonaparte (1746–85) studied law in Pisa, and married Letizia Ramolino in 1764. They had 13 children, eight of whom survived: JOSEPH (born 1768), NAPOLEON (born 1769), Lucien (born 1775), Elisa (born 1777), Louis (born 1778), Pauline (born 1780), who married into the BORGHESE FAMILY, Caroline (born 1782), who married JOACHIM MURAT, and Jerome (born 1784). The family supported PASQUALE PAOLI’s struggle for Corsican independence from the republic of GENOA, and from France after the Genoese ceded the island to the French in 1768. However, the family quickly seized the opportunities brought by

(or Ruggiero) journalist and political figure Born in Naples, Bonghi studied law, philosophy, and classical languages, identified with no particular school of thought, and displayed intellectual independence throughout his career as a journalist, political commentator, and member of parliament. Politically liberal in his youth, he was a revolutionist in 1848, and a political exile in Turin in the 1850s. CAVOUR encouraged him to return to Naples in 1860 to influence public opinion in favor of the national government. Bonghi was elected to parliament in 1861, founded the Turin newspaper La Stampa in 1862, held various academic appointments at the universities of Naples, Pavia, and Turin teaching law, history, and philosophy. In parliament he sat with the HISTORICAL RIGHT and served as minister of public education (1874–76). He showed a particular interest in the ROMAN QUESTION, which he would have liked to see settled on terms favorable to the state. He believed that civil life had to rest on a strong religious foundation, but he was anticlerical enough to want government controls on the power of the clergy. His goal was an alliance of CHURCH AND STATE against the forces of material-

160 Boniface VIII

ism and socialism, which he saw as a mounting threat in the last years of his life. Bonghi was a severe critic of the LIBERAL LEFT after it came to power in 1876. He criticized the TRIPLE ALLIANCE, the governments of FRANCESCO CRISPI and GIOVANNI GIOLITTI, and campaigned for a strong Italian cultural presence abroad. He was a founder of the DANTE ALIGHIERI SOCIETY for the promotion of Italian language and culture. Bonghi looked upon politics as the active pursuit of values and ideals, and a form of cultural war.

Boniface VIII See COLONNA FAMILY; DANTE ALIGHIERI.

(July 1921–February 1922), he negotiated the TREATY OF RAPALLO. During the Fascist period (1922–43) Bonomi retired to private life, practiced law, and wrote scholarly works on Italian foreign policy and the national unification movement. The regime did not disturb him. In 1942–43 he formed and led a coalition of antiFascist parliamentarians but avoided involvement in the RESISTANCE. As prime minister from June 1944 to June 1945 he persuaded the Allies to give Italy the status of cobelligerent against Germany and restore Italian administration in occupied provinces. At the time of his death he was serving as president of the senate (1948–51). Bonomi lacked political charisma but was respected for his personal tact, diplomatic skills, and deep understanding of the country’s problems.

Bonino, Emma See RADICAL PARTY. Bonomi, Paolo See COLDIRETTI. Bonomelli, Geremia See SCALABRINI, GIOVANNI BATTISTA.

Bontempelli, Massimo See NOVECENTO MOVEMENT.

Bonomi, Ivanoe (1873–1951) moderate socialist prime minister The political career of this social democratic leader spanned 60 years from the early 1890s to his death. Born in Mantua, Bonomi studied and practiced law. He became a socialist activist in his 20s as an organizer of farm workers. Closely identified with the reformist politics of FILIPPO TURATI, Bonomi sought to address social issues by parliamentary action. His book Le vie nuove del socialismo (The news ways of socialism, 1907) made a case for the revisionist policy of legality and collaboration with progressive groups outside the socialist camp. In 1912 he was expelled from the Italian Socialist Party (PSI) for his refusal to follow the party line of opposition to the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR. With LEONIDA BISSOLATI he founded the moderate Socialist Reformist Party, which gathered little support. Becoming progressively more nationalist, Bonomi served as minister of public works (1916–17, 1919) and minister of war (1920–21). As prime minister

Bordiga, Amadeo (1889–1970) Communist Party founder and leader This prominent Marxist theoretician and political figure, born in Naples, was among the socialist dissidents who left the Italian Socialist Party (PSI) in 1921 to found the Communist Party of Italy, precursor of the Italian Communist Party (PCI), and served as its first secretary. The success of Lenin’s Bolshevik faction in Russia in 1917 confirmed Bordiga’s belief that only a highly disciplined and ideologically uncompromising political party could lead the working class to a successful revolution. He rejected parliamentary politics, grassroots organizations, the factory councils advocated by ANTONIO GRAMSCI, and the notion of revolutionary spontaneity among workers. Arrested and confined by the Fascist regime, he was allowed to practice his profession as an engineer after being released in 1930. Bordiga dropped out of politics and was expelled

Borghese, Prince Junio Valerio 161

from the party, but his intellectual influence was still felt after 1945 by Marxists who rejected the Communist Party’s line of accommodation with liberal democracy.

Borgese, Giuseppe Antonio (1882–1952) writer and literary critic Born in Palermo, Borgese was initially drawn to the school of philosophical idealism headed by BENEDETTO CROCE, but soon joined the ranks of young intellectuals who rejected all rigid philosophies as culturally limiting and stifling. Borgese was attracted to German culture and taught German literature at the universities of Rome and Milan from 1910 to 1931. His interest in German culture had more to do with the appeal of ROMANTICISM than admiration for German militarism. He favored Italy’s intervention in WORLD WAR I and headed the government’s press and propaganda bureau from 1917 to 1919. He was a witness and participant in the political and ideological dilemmas of the postwar years. In his novel Rubè, published in 1938 but written in 1921, he portrayed the state of political confusion in the mind of its protagonist, who seems unable to choose between the extremes of socialism and fascism. Borgese rejected both. He lived in Italy until 1931, when he refused to take the oath of loyalty that the regime required of all university professors and left the country. In self-imposed exile in the United States, he taught at the New School for Social Research, Smith College, and the University of Chicago. In Goliath: The March of Fascism (1937), Borgese portrayed fascism as a cultural malady afflicting the petty bourgeoisie, which he saw as a sick class infected by nationalism and the Nietzschean cult of the superman. During WORLD WAR II Borgese was active in antiFascist politics. After the war he helped draft a constitution for a new world order based on economic justice, shared resources, and equal representation of the world’s regions in an international organization having real power.

Borgese returned to Italy in 1948 and resumed his old chair of literature at the University of Milan.

Borghese, Prince Junio Valerio (1906–1974) naval officer and political figure This member of the BORGHESE FAMILY carried on the family military tradition. His personal charisma, independence of mind, military professionalism, and ability to inspire loyalty suggest similarities with the Renaissance CONDOTTIERI of his ancestry. His well-planned attacks on ships supplying the anti-Franco forces during the Spanish civil war could not be publicized at the time because Italy was not officially at war, but they caught the attention of BENITO MUSSOLINI and gave Borghese access to Italy’s highest military and political circles. He developed new techniques of naval attack using small submarines, torpedo boats (MAS), and human-guided torpedoes. During WORLD WAR II he led successful attacks with human-guided torpedoes against British ships in Gibraltar and Alexandria. After Italy’s surrender to the Allies in September 1943, Borghese was among the few naval officers who sided with Mussolini and continued to fight against the Allies. As commander of the battalion Decima Mas he fought against Italian and Yugoslav partisans. His insistence on independent action led to his temporary arrest for insubordination, but he was too popular with the troops to be detained. The slogan of his corps was Tutti per Junio, Junio per tutti (All for Junio, Junio for all). His troops attempted to keep Tito’s Yugoslav forces out of Italian territory. A tribunal sentenced him to 12 years in jail after the war, but he was released almost immediately. In postwar politics he was active in the neo-Fascist Italian Social Movement (MSI). In March 1971 he staged a coup against the government with a ragtag band of followers that was quickly dispersed. He fled to Spain to avoid arrest. His funeral in Rome brought out large numbers of personal admirers and political sympathizers. His

162 Borghese family

book of memoirs covering the years 1935–43 was published in English under the title Sea Devils (1952).

Borghese family family of the Roman aristocracy This family of the Roman aristocracy traces its origins back to 13th-century Siena. They moved to Rome in the 16th century, gaining influence in the Catholic Church and the court of Spain. Camillo Borghese became Pope PAUL V; other family members were cardinals, senators, and soldiers. Marcantonio Borghese (1598–1658), nephew of Pope Paul V and the largest Roman landowner, received from the Spanish king the titles of prince and grandee of Spain. Breaking with the family tradition of loyalty to papacy and monarchy, Prince Camillo Borghese (1775–1832) sided with the JACOBINS in 1798 and supported the Napoleonic regime. He married Pauline Bonaparte (1780–1825), a sister of NAPOLEON I, at the emperor’s request, became a general in the French army, and governor of Napoleon’s Italian possessions. The Borghese did not support the movement for Italian unification and remained loyal to the PAPACY. They belonged to the so-called Black Aristocracy of Rome that made peace with the Italian state slowly and grudgingly. The family’s monumental Palazzo Borghese, a splendid example of aristocratic architecture, was an exclusive meetingplace for national and international celebrities. The Borghese Museum and Gallery, open to the public, house the extensive art collections of the family.

Borgia family family of Spanish origin connected to Italy through the papacy The Borjas of Spain, having acquired notoriety beyond all proportion to their role in Italian history, continue to intrigue historians. The first member of the family to gain prominence was Cardinal Alonso de Borja, who became Pope Calixtus III (1455–58). Feeling isolated as a foreign pope and none too sure of the loyalty of his

Roman subjects, Calixtus called many of his Catalan relatives to Rome, including his nephew Rodrigo Borjas who became Pope ALEXANDER VI in 1492. Controversy surrounds Alexander VI and his two children, Cesare and Lucrezia Borgia, who are euphemistically described as the pope’s “nephews.” Cesare (1475–1507) was made bishop in 1492 and cardinal in 1493, but renounced the clerical life to pursue worldly goals and glory after his older brother was murdered in 1498. He led the military campaigns designed to consolidate papal rule in the Romagna region and against families of the Roman nobility unwilling to acknowledge papal authority. His considerable political and military skills brought him success in these campaigns. His reward was power and the title of duke of Romagna, bestowed on him by his father in 1501. Formally a papal vassal, Cesare set out to create a model state within the papal domain. He earned the gratitude of his subjects by suppressing BRIGANDAGE, establishing a popular militia, providing tax relief, and applying laws equitably. But his efforts to centralize power in his own hands and curb local autonomies and the privileges of powerful families encountered opposition, which Cesare could not overcome despite his well-deserved reputation for ruthlessness. Faced by internal revolts, by the opposition of King Louis XII of France who did not want to see a strong papal state, poor health, and undermined finally by the pope’s premature death in 1503, Cesare’s power began to unravel. Forced out of the PAPAL STATES, he fled to Naples, Spain, and Navarre. He was killed in battle fighting for the king of Navarre, who was his brotherin-law. NICCOLÒ MACHIAVELLI regarded Cesare as a model ruler defeated by bad luck, but posterity has viewed him rather as an excessively ambitious, unscrupulous, and cruel despot. Cesare’s sister Lucrezia (1480–1519) has acquired an unfounded reputation for deviousness, immorality, and sexual license. Her alleged proclivity for poisoning lovers and rivals has fueled endless stories. The record suggests a less lurid life. Brought up at the papal court and utterly loyal to her family, she was a pawn in the

Borromeo, Carlo, and Borromeo, Federico 163

An artist’s depiction of Cesare Borgia (left) seated with Machiavelli (Library of Congress)

hands of her father and brother. Her three marriages were designed to further their political designs. With her third and final marriage (1501) into the ESTE FAMILY, she became duchess of Ferrara. She ruled capably and compassionately, attracted artists and writers of note to her court, and brought cultural distinction to the city. Her subjects mourned her death from complications following the birth of her seventh child. The unsavory reputation of Alexander VI, Cesare, and Lucrezia can be ascribed to rumors spread by Romans who resented the dominance of a foreign family.

Borromeo, Carlo (1538–1584), and Borromeo, Federico (1564–1631) church figure and religious reformer Cardinal Carlo Borromeo, archbishop of Milan and major figure of the CATHOLIC REFORMATION, was born to a family of the Lombard nobility. In

1560 his uncle Pope Pius IV (1559–65) called him to Rome to serve as his personal secretary. In that capacity, Borromeo helped plan the work of the last sessions of the COUNCIL OF TRENT. He was ordained into the priesthood in 1563 and appointed archbishop of Milan in 1564. He took up residence in Milan after the death of his uncle, turning his diocese into a laboratory of religious reform. His intent was to renew the church, regain the religious initiative in Europe, contain the spread of Protestantism, and recover lost territory. He insisted on strict clerical discipline, made priests accountable to the bishop, resisted secular interference in clerical affairs, promoted spiritual practices and rituals, and strengthened bonds between clergy and laity. Central to his reform were the practices of confession and penance as means to reclaim souls and assert the spiritual primacy of the clergy. Borromeo understood religious reform as an essentially spiritual undertaking to be carried out

164 Borsellino, Paolo

in an almost military manner by model priests who could influence the beliefs and behavior of the laity. His canonization in 1610 showed that he made a deep impression on his contemporaries. Federico Borromeo, appointed archbishop of Milan in 1595, completed the reforms left unfinished by his older cousin.

Borsellino, Paolo See MAFIA.

efforts to resolve the conflict of CHURCH AND STATE failed. In trying to reach a compromise, he alienated both liberals and conservatives. PIUS IX supported Don Bosco’s grassroots initiatives to broaden the church’s popular base. Don Bosco did much to enhance the popular appeal of the church, particularly among rural populations, which saw him as a model of spirituality and social activism on their behalf. He was canonized in 1934. The English translation of his autobiography is entitled Memoirs of the Oratory (1984).

Bosco, Giovanni (1815–1888) religious reformer, educator, and social worker This Catholic priest, popularly known as Don Bosco, was born to a peasant family near the town of Asti in the region of PIEDMONT. He worked as a fieldhand, was able eventually to attend school on a regular basis, and was ordained into the priesthood in 1841. His religious vocation went hand in hand with an equally strong motivation to teach. In the 1840s he preached and taught orphans, peasant and working-class boys, encouraged and helped by the archbishop of Turin, Luigi Fransoni (1789– 1862), who was later expelled from Piedmont for his opposition to government control of clerical affairs. Don Bosco shared Franzoni’s hostility to secular power, to the REVOLUTION of 1848, and the anticlerical laws promulgated by the government in the 1850s. But he did take advantage of constitutional provisions protecting freedom of the press and of association to publish a Catholic journal and establish mutual aid societies among young workers. He complied reluctantly with, and partly circumvented, laws expanding the role of public education. The Salesian movement, which he started in the 1850s, developed into an international organization that combines spiritual guidance with secular schooling. In 1860–61 he was accused of conspiring against the state, but the government produced no evidence to substantiate these charges. Don Bosco was respectful toward the monarchy, but feared the influence of anticlerical elements in the national government. His

Bosco, Rosario Garibaldi See FASCI SICILIANI.

Boselli, Paolo (1838–1932) political figure and prime minister Boselli represented his native district of Savona in parliament from 1870 to 1919 as a moderate conservative. A lawyer, professor of finance at the University of Rome, and an expert on maritime law, he enjoyed a reputation for professional competence and fairness. The highlight of his political career was his appointment as prime minister in June 1916 as head of a government of national unity during WORLD WAR I. As prime minister, he had to contend with deep political divisions that were barely disguised by the need for wartime unity. A fluent and learned speaker, Boselli excelled at patriotic oratory. Already in poor health when he became prime minister, he was forced to resign in October 1917 in the aftermath of the defeat at CAPORETTO. Appointed senator in 1921, a supporter of the Fascist regime, and the last surviving member of the parliament of 1870 that had taken Rome from the pope, Boselli in March 1929 was given the honor of presenting to the senate for ratification the law that settled the ROMAN QUESTION and ended the conflict of CHURCH AND STATE. A nervous tic that caused him to shake his head prompted the quip that Boselli was the perfect politician because he could say yes with his mouth and no with his head.

Botta, Carlo 165

Bossi, Umberto (1941–

)

political figure, leader of northern Italy’s separatist movement Born near Varese in 1941, Bossi studied medicine and law at the universities of Pavia and Padua. A student in the 1960s, he was attracted to the political movements of the Left and to environmental causes. He gained attention in the late 1970s by calling for regional autonomy and loosening the grip of the central government over the regions. In 1982 he founded the newspaper Lombardia Autonomista and in 1984 he was a cofounder and secretary of the Lega Lombarda (Lombard League), named after the alliance of medieval cities that had fought for regional independence. Heading the league’s ticket, he was elected to the senate in 1987. The movement caught on, with Bossi calling for separation of the northern regions from the rest of the country or for a redistribution of power in favor of regional governments. In 1991 he founded the Lega Nord (Northern League) that aimed at creating a united front among northern separatists. In the elections of 1992 the Northern League won 8.7 percent of the popular vote and sent Bossi to parliament as its leading representative. On the national stage, Bossi won attention for his outspoken, blunt, politically incorrect, and often downright crude language and demeanor. While his appeal was limited to the northern regions, he nevertheless became a national figure by playing on resentment of big government, regional animosities, and anti-immigration sentiments. In 1994 he formed a short-lived tactical alliance with SILVIO BERLUSCONI, but pulled out quickly when the connection appeared to undermine his appeal among voters. Although the Northern League has lost much of its appeal at the polls, Bossi remains popular among certain voters. He rejoined Berlusconi in his second government, formed in June 2001, serving as a minister without portfolio. Bossi’s message, if not his style, has mellowed considerably since the early days of the movement. Today he calls for greater regional autonomy rather than separation, smaller government, and economic growth. He lists himself

as a journalist and writes regularly for Padania, the newspaper of the Northern League.

Botta, Carlo (1766–1837) liberal historian, literary critic, and public figure Botta, a historian active in public life, influenced the development of liberal ideology in 19th-century Italy. A supporter of the FRENCH REVOLUTION and NAPOLEON, Botta served in Napoleon’s army as a medic in 1796–97 and continued to serve the French government in various capacities until Napoleon’s downfall in 1814, when Botta retired from public service. Afterward, he held various academic posts in France and devoted himself principally to writing. His initial admiration for the French Revolution and Napoleon are not evident in his mature writings. It is largely through these that he exerted influence on his contemporaries. His principal works are a history of the American Revolution, Guerra d’indipendenza degli Stati Uniti d’America (The American war of independence, 1809), and two volumes on the history of Italy, Storia d’Italia dal 1789 al 1814 (History of Italy from 1789 to 1814, 1824) and Storia d’Italia continuata da quella del Guicciardini (History of Italy, continued from Guicciardini’s, 1832). In these works, he developed interpretations of Italian history that are considered fundamental. Drawing from the disillusionment with Napoleonic rule that was shared by many of his contemporaries, in his work on the American Revolution Botta compared George Washington to Napoleon, the American general personifying the virtuous citizen and Napoleon the despot. Botta found little to admire and much to deplore in the attitude of Italian JACOBINS who welcomed French rule. While he gave them credit for being motivated by generous sentiments, he questioned their overly optimistic view of human nature, deplored their utopian expectations, and their fanatical zeal. Botta, a literary classicist, was also critical of the culture of ROMANTICISM, which he saw as foreign and alien to the classical spirit of Italian culture.

166 Bottai, Giuseppe

Botta’s works, widely read by his contemporaries, influenced the thinking of liberals seeking a middle path between the status quo and revolution.

Bottai, Giuseppe (1895–1959) Fascist leader, journalist, and social theoretician Born in Rome to a lower-middle-class family, Bottai was that rare figure who finds equal satisfaction in politics, war, art, and the life of the mind. Attracted to FUTURISM as early as 1914, in 1915 he interrupted his studies to volunteer for military service in WORLD WAR I. During the war he joined the elite ARDITI shock troops. Back in civilian life, he was a founder of the Roman section of the Fascist movement and its leader after breaking his ties with futurism. No one more than Bottai felt the irresistible spell of BENITO MUSSOLINI, whom he would always regard as an exceptional personality. His Fascist faith never wavered, even as he suffered repeated setbacks within the Fascist Party. He argued for making the party democratic, for keeping it in touch with public opinion, creating and giving real power to the Fascist corporations, and broadening access to the schools. The corporate reforms of 1926–34 owed much to Bottai, who was deeply involved in theoretical debates and legislating. But things did not go his way. The Fascist Party became progressively more bureaucratic and isolated from the rest of the country, the corporations never acquired the functions and autonomy favored by Bottai, and the regime became entirely dependent on Mussolini. He did make some headway as minister of national education (1936–43). The school reform of 1939 that he sponsored and which took his name provided for manual labor training at the primary level, a single secondary school track at the middle school level, and improved technical training at the secondary level. The compulsory study of Latin at the secondary level was designed to make the universities accessible to all students who completed secondary schooling at age 14. The imminence of military defeat in WORLD WAR II made Bottai rethink his allegiance to fascism and Mussolini.

As a member of the Fascist Grand Council, he played a primary role in the plot that removed Mussolini from power in July 1943. Wanted by the authorities of the ITALIAN SOCIAL REPUBLIC, he escaped and served in the French foreign legion for the remainder of the war. Bottai was notable for keeping his internal dissidence within limits acceptable to the regime. His critical intelligence was fully displayed in the reviews that he directed, Critica Fascista (1923–43), Archivio di Studi Corporativi (1930–43), Primato (1940–43), and ABC (1953–59).

Botticelli, Sandro (1445–1510) artist whose paintings reflect the religious and secular concerns of Renaissance humanism A towering figure among the giants of RENAISSANCE painting, Botticelli learned the craft as an apprentice to Filippo Lippi (1432–69) and perhaps Andrea del Verrocchio (1435–88). His complete command of color, perspective, and composition enabled him to achieve extraordinary harmony of line and intensity of feeling in his paintings. His best-known works, including the Primavera and Birth of Venus dating from the 1470s and ’80s, show the influence of NEOPLATONISM. The central figure in the Primavera sums up Botticelli’s ability to combine a pagan appreciation of physical beauty with a sense of spirituality that bridges the gap between paganism and Christianity. During this period of his career Botticelli moved in the select circle of artists and scholars who surrounded LORENZO DE’ MEDICI. His later works reflect the extreme religious intensity inspired by the preaching of GIROLAMO SAVONAROLA, whom Botticelli followed and admired. Because Botticelli’s art mirrored the ideas of his time, his works have both artistic and historical value.

Bourbons dynasty of French origin that ruled in France, Spain, and Italy The royal Bourbon dynasty takes its name from the castle of Bourbon, the family seat in central

Bramante, Donato 167

France. In 1589 Henry IV became the first Bourbon king of France. A branch of the family ruled in Spain from 1700 to 1931, a second branch in the Kingdom of NAPLES and the KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES from 1735 to 1860, and a third in PARMA from 1748 to 1859, in all cases with interruptions along the way due to the fortunes of war and revolution. The Bourbons of Naples are particularly important in the history of Italy. The history of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies unfolds in the successive reigns of CHARLES OF BOURBON, FERDINAND I, FRANCIS I, FERDINAND II, and FRANCIS II. The Spanish Bourbons were established in Italy by hereditary right to the duchy of Parma. Charles of Bourbon was the son of the first Bourbon king of Spain, Philip V, and ELISABETTA FARNESE of Parma. Charles ruled first as duke of Parma and Piacenza (1731–35) and then as king of Naples (1735–1759). He left Naples to become king of Spain, where he ruled as Charles III (1759–88). His son Ferdinand I succeeded him as king of Naples. With Ferdinand the dynasty became fully acclimated to Naples, took on the language, manners, and color of the place, and cut its ties to Spain. Although the Bourbons and HABSBURGS were rivals in many parts of Europe, in Italy the two dynasties worked together. Both Bourbons and Habsburgs backed away from government reforms after the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789, fearful that concessions to their dissatisfied subjects would only fuel demands for more change, lead to revolution, and the loss of their thrones, as had happened to the Bourbons in France. Liberal insurrections in 1821 and 1848 reinforced the Bourbons’ determination to hold the line against concessions. In both instances the Bourbons had to rely on Austrian troops to put down the revolts and reestablish their authority. Bourbon monarchs did not lack support at home, for they were popular with peasants, the urban lower classes, and the conservative aristocracy. In the city of Naples where many people were employed at court or benefited from royal largesse, the Bourbons could usually rely on the lower orders, often derogatively called the lazzaroni (riffraff), who in times of trouble could be

expected to make common cause with the monarchy against middle-class liberals and intellectuals who wanted a voice in government. The undisguised hostility of educated liberals toward a monarchy that resisted demands for change made the Bourbons suspicious of intellectuals in general. Hence their dislike of all pennaruli (pen pushers) and their fear of the educated and of education in general. The imprisonment of prominent Neapolitans for expressing their disapproval of government caused scandal throughout western Europe. As time went by the Bourbons became increasingly dependent on the support of conservative powers like Austria and Russia. Austria’s defeat in the Second WAR OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE (1859) brought the Bourbon dynasts to the verge of collapse. GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI evicted them from Naples in 1860 when the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies became part of the unified kingdom of Italy. Seen as the epitome of blind reaction at the time of national unification, the memory and image of Bourbon rule improved by the 1890s, as many Neapolitans came to question the advantages of national unification. The saying “We were better off when we were worse off” reflected some nostalgia for the days of Bourbon rule. Something similar occurred a century later as southerners reassessed the past and their place in the national state in the light of separatist movements and new tensions between North and South.

Bramante, Donato (1444–1514) Renaissance artist who set the pace and style of architectural design Born in Urbino, Bramante was trained as a painter but is remembered primarily as an architect. He first appears as an architect working in Milan in 1485 at the court of Duke LODOVICO SFORZA. His Milanese projects, which include the rebuilding of the Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie (1492), reveal Bramante’s preference for the use of circular forms and superimposed orders. The rounded forms give a compact look to the exteriors of Bramante’s buildings while

168 Brenner Pass

imparting a sense of spaciousness and light to the interiors. In 1499 Bramante left Milan for Rome, where he became chief papal architect. Placed in charge of large-scale projects of urban renewal that involved tearing up of old quarters, Bramante became affectionately known as Il Ruinante (The Wrecker). Perhaps Bramante’s most influential building is the small Tempietto (little temple) alongside the Church of San Pietro in Montorio built in 1502 on the spot where Saint Peter is thought to have been martyred. The Tempietto marks the culmination of Bramante’s fascination with circular shapes, use of columns, and superimposed orders. It is a compact structure that provides a textbook demonstration of the classical style typical of RENAISSANCE architecture. Bramante also designed and oversaw the start of the rebuilding of the Basilica of Saint Peter in 1506, launching the fateful project that would soon help ignite the Protestant Reformation by arousing the anger of northern Europeans at such lavish papal expenditures. MICHELANGELO later altered the design of Saint Peter’s drastically, but Bramante’s influence is still noticeable in the cruciform shape of the structure (which Bramante designed with four equal arms) and the enormous dome surmounting it. To satisfy JULIUS II’s impatience for rapid results, Bramante devised quick techniques of construction and ornamentation, such as the use of stucco and cast vaults. His pervasive influence makes him the founder of Renaissance architecture.

Brenner Pass See ALPS; TRENTINO–ALTO ADIGE. Bresci, Gaetano See ANARCHISM; FATTI DI MAGGIO; TERRORISM; UMBERTO I.

brigandage The term brigandage refers to the armed resistance that the recently unified kingdom of Italy faced from 1861 to 1865 in the provinces of the former KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES. Brigandage

reflects the national government’s desire to present acts of rebellion as instances of criminal behavior rather than as a form of popular resistance against the state. Instances of organized popular resistance against government were by no means unknown in the South, but the phenomenon of the 1860s was much more pervasive than its predecessors. It was the direct result of the events of 1860, when soldiers from the disbanded Neapolitan army roamed the countryside, the deposed BOURBONS intrigued to regain their lost throne, and expectations of rapid improvement were frustrated. The extension of Piedmontese law to the new territories, military conscription, high taxes, rising food prices, lack of land reform, and a cultural acceptance of the outlaw as a popular hero figure contributed to the spread of brigandage. The country experienced a form of undeclared civil war that resembles in some ways the Civil War that was then being fought in the United States. In both cases, a unionist North prevailed over a secessionist South, martial law prevailed, and the period of reconstruction was marked by the imposition of northern law on a recalcitrant population. However, unlike the American, the Italian southern resistance had no government of its own, encountered strong opposition within the South itself, and pitted urban groups generally supportive of national unification and the state against a disaffected rural population. Resistance was strongest in the regions of BASILICATA, CALABRIA, and PUGLIA, where martial law was widely applied. The insurgents were organized in bands that were occasionally strong enough to take over entire towns, but never strong enough to maintain stable control over a large territory. They waged guerrilla warfare against the regular army, their combined strength at the height of the resistance in 1862 being estimated at approximately 80,000. Against them the government deployed an army of about 120,000. Official sources give the figures of 5,212 for the number of rebels killed in combat or otherwise executed, and of 5,044 for those who were detained. The number of army casualties is not known.

Bruni, Leonardo 169

The severe repression restored law and order in the South but left behind a legacy of regional animosity and bitterness with long-term consequences in national politics. Brigandage put the SOUTHERN QUESTION on the national agenda, made northerners aware of the problems of the South, and initiated the still ongoing debate on the coexistence of North and South within the same state. Brigandage tends to recur when the authority of the state weakens, as it did in Sicily in the aftermath of World War II under SALVATORE GIULIANO, when rebelliousness also expressed a desire for regional autonomy. It is also connected to the illegal activities of the MAFIA, which have at times taken the form of armed resistance against the state.

Santa Maria degli Angeli (1437), the Pazzi Chapel (1433), and possibly the façade of the Pitti Palace. Some of these works were completed after his death. Brunelleschi’s study of classical buildings in Rome inspired him to make extensive use of arches supported by columns. His style is characterized by spare use of ornamental devices and the dominance of pure lines, which he regarded as the hallmark of ancient Greek and Roman architecture. His search for symmetry and proportion led him to study and apply mathematics to architecture and engineering. He is considered to be the most influential architect of his generation, bridging the gap between medieval and Renaissance styles of construction. Buried under the spectacular dome that he built, his tomb was rediscovered in 1972.

Brunelleschi, Filippo (1377–1446) Florentine architect, sculptor, goldsmith, and clockmaker This versatile artist is remembered primarily as the designer and engineer of the enormous dome that surmounts Florence’s cathedral, the Church of Santa Maria del Fiore. Brunelleschi gained public recognition in 1401 for his design of the doors to the cathedral’s baptistery, the commission for which eventually went to his lifelong rival LORENZO GHIBERTI. Whatever Brunelleschi’s talents as a sculptor may have been, he is remembered as a supreme architect and builder. Brunelleschi won the commission to build the dome on the cathedral in 1418 after a grueling competition. The secretive, cantankerous architect produced a successful model whose engineering features, like the supposed use of iron chains embedded in the structure, continue to puzzle the experts. The dome of Santa Maria del Fiore was designed to surpass in size that of the Pantheon, the largest building of ancient Rome. To preserve the towering effect envisaged by Brunelleschi, the city of Florence forbids the construction of any higher structure. Other works by Brunelleschi, all in Florence, include the Foundling Hospital (begun in 1419), the Churches of San Lorenzo (1420), Santo Spirito (1436), and

Bruni, Leonardo (1370–1444) Renaissance scholar and leading humanist figure Bruni was the dominant figure of Florentine HUMANISM in the first half of the 15th century. Of modest social origin, Bruni gave up the study of law to devote himself to the study of classical Greek with the Greek scholar Manuel Chrysoloras. Admired for his scholarly accomplishments, Bruni led the revival of learning with translations of Aristotle, Plato, Plutarch, and Xenophon into Latin that set a new standard in classical studies. His familiarity with ancient texts enabled him to speak with authority on the issues of the day. In Laudatio Florentinae urbis (In praise of the city of Florence), published in 1401, Bruni held up Florentine republican government as a model for others to emulate. This text is considered to be the manifesto of civic humanism. In his Historiarum florentini populi (History of the Florentine people), begun around 1415 and left unfinished at his death, Bruni covered the history of Florence chronologically from its origins to 1404, using sources critically and interpreting events. His message was that the success of the Florentine state was due to its republican origins. Bruni may have written his history to

170 Bruno, Giordano

make a case for Florence against its rival city of Milan, governed despotically by the VISCONTI FAMILY, but his argument that republican institutions nurture a strong civic spirit, prevent the rise of political despots, and promote economic prosperity made a deep impression on his contemporaries and influenced political thinking. Bruni worked for the Florentine government and the PAPACY. In Florence he held the high office of chancellor of the republic and was a successful diplomat. Greatly admired for his vast learning and unmatched eloquence, Bruni was buried with state honors in the Church of Santa Croce.

Bruno, Giordano (1548–1600) scholar, theologian, and religious dissenter Bruno was born in the town of Nola, near Naples, to an impoverished family of the local nobility. Il Nolano (The Nolan), as Bruno was often called, was admitted to the Dominican order in 1565, ordained into the priesthood in 1572, and awarded a doctorate in theology in 1575. In 1571 he was invited to Rome to instruct the pope in mnemotechny (the art of memorizing), which Bruno had mastered, but the pontiff’s favor did not save him from arrest and eviction from Naples in 1576 on charges of practicing magic. Thus began Bruno’s life of wanderings, which took him to northern Italy, Switzerland, France, England, and Germany. Wherever he went he was embroiled in disputes with Aristotelian academics, whose views Bruno assailed mercilessly. In 1591 he accepted an invitation to tutor a young Venetian nobleman in the ars memoriae. His young student denounced him to the Holy Office on a variety of charges, including womanizing (Bruno made light of his admitted fondness for women), blasphemy, practicing magic, holding that there were many worlds and that the universe is eternal. The last two charges were particularly serious because of their heretical implications. If there were many inhabited worlds, for whom had Christ died? If the universe was eternal, what

became of God’s omnipotence? Bruno’s pantheism (the belief that God resides in all natural things) brought into question the sacramental role of the clergy, for if God is in all things then recourse to the clergy may not be necessary. The Venetian authorities who examined Bruno decided to turn him over to the Holy Office in Rome, where he was subjected to a second trial. He was questioned, tortured, and his writings were examined. When he refused to acknowledge his errors after a seven-year ordeal, the INQUISITION turned him over to the secular authority for execution. On February 17, 1600 (a Jubilee Year when Rome was crowded with pilgrims from all over the Catholic world), Bruno was burned at the stake in Rome’s Campo dei Fiori. Bruno’s philosophy remains enigmatic, for it is not easy to find a logical thread through his many writings that have survived. He was unquestionably attracted to magic, to the mysteries of the ancient Egyptians and Hebrews, and believed in the pursuit of knowledge by intuition rather than reason. His disputatious, downright quarrelsome temper, won him many enemies. Although he rejected Protestantism, Protestants regarded him as a martyr because he had challenged papal authority. Nineteenth-century anticlericals made him a hero for the same reason (see ANTICLERICALISM). The statue raised to him in Campo dei Fiori in 1887 has been the site of anticlerical demonstrations ever since; the anticlerical Giordano Bruno Society is named after him.

Buonarroti, Filippo Michele (1761–1837) political conspirator, founder and leader of secret societies A lifelong commitment to conspiracy and revolution made Buonarroti a cult figure among radicals of his and later generations. Born in Pisa to a patrician family of magistrates and lawyers whose ancestors included MICHELANGELO, he studied law, music, and philosophy at the Uni-

Burlamacchi, Francesco 171

versity of Pisa. Influenced by his reading of Jean Jacques Rousseau, he espoused the dogmas of equality and popular sovereignty, to which he added a commitment to overthrow governments by violent means. He joined his first secret lodge in 1786, enthused over the French Revolution, and worked for the revolutionary government in CORSICA promoting religious and land reforms. Robespierre appointed him revolutionary commissioner for the town of Oneglia (1794–95). In 1796 he participated in the Conspiracy of Equals that tried and failed to take over the French government. He spent most of the Napoleonic period under house arrest, treated leniently by NAPOLEON I, who seems to have felt affection for Buonarroti. That did not prevent Buonarroti from conspiring against Napoleon. In 1809–10 he launched the secret society of the Sublime and Perfect Masters, whose members were expected to infiltrate governments and other subversive secret societies. When that society was discovered and dismantled in 1824, he turned his attention to the CARBONARI, reorganized the association, and controlled its activities. Buonarroti clashed with GIUSEPPE MAZZINI, a younger conspirator whom Buonarroti regarded as a rival. For several years each sought to control the other’s network, until the police repressed both. There were significant differences between Buonarroti and Mazzini. Buonarroti relied on secret conspiracies, Mazzini called for popular revolt; Buonarroti expected France to lead the revolution, Mazzini wanted the initiative to come from Italy. Buonarroti’s secret society I Veri Italiani (True Italians) competed with Mazzini’s Giovine Italia (YOUNG ITALY). Buonarroti became a legendary figure of the Left and his book Babeuf’s Conspiracy for Equality (1828) was obligatory reading for all radicals. Karl Marx read it and may have been inspired by Buonarroti’s theory of revolution to conceptualize communists as the revolutionary vanguard.

Buonarroti, Michelangelo See MICHELANGELO BUONARROTI.

Buontalenti, Bernardo See MANNERISM. Buozzi, Bruno (1881–1944) socialist labor organizer and anti-Fascist Buozzi belonged to the moderate reformist wing of the Italian Socialist Party (PSI). Born in the province of Ferrara where there was intense labor strife, a mechanic by trade, he devoted himself to organizing workers, always putting their concrete interests ahead of ideological considerations or questions of party loyalty. In 1911 he became secretary of the national union of metal workers. He opposed Italian intervention in WORLD WAR I, but helped mobilize workers when the country went to war. After the war he called for the eight-hour day and negotiated wage improvements. He led strikes for concrete economic gains, but condemned strikes that were politically motivated. He was elected to parliament in 1919, 1921, and 1924, and served as secretary of the General Confederation of Labor in 1925–26. Buozzi’s efforts to find space for a labor movement free of political ties led to discussions with the government of BENITO MUSSOLINI, but the discussions came to nothing. In 1926 Buozzi joined the anti-Fascist exiles in France, hoping to keep an independent labor movement alive abroad. The Gestapo arrested him in France in 1941. Freed in July 1943, he resumed his activities as a labor organizer, settled strikes in Turin, and negotiated agreements between Catholic and communist labor organizations. He was again arrested by the Germans in Rome in January 1944 and executed by them during their retreat from Rome.

Burlamacchi, Francesco (1498–1548) political dissenter and conspirator Belonging to one of the influential mercantile families of LUCCA, unlike most members of his class who preferred to tend to their business interests, Burlamacchi showed interest in political life and public office. In 1533 he became gonfaloniere (head of government) of the Republic of

172 Busoni, Ferruccio

Lucca. Raised again to the same office in 1546, he led a secret conspiracy against Florentine dominance in Tuscany. His supporters were political malcontents from nearby PISA and Pistoia, and rivals of the ruling MEDICI family. Burlamacchi apparently planned to use the rural militia of his city to consolidate his control of the government in Lucca, move against Florence, and topple Medici rule. The conspirators hoped to replace the Medici government with a confederation of self-governing cities and to promote religious reform, but they lacked the resources to carry out their ambitious plan. Burlamacchi was probably influenced by Protestant sympathies common among the merchant aristocracy of Lucca. When

the conspiracy was discovered, the Medici pressured Lucca into bringing Burlamacchi to justice. Arrested and tortured, he went to his death without revealing the names of his accomplices. Burlamacchi was rehabilitated as a patriot and anticlerical reformer during the RISORGIMENTO and a statue to him was erected in the central square of his city.

Busoni, Ferruccio See GOZZI, CARLO. Buttiglione, Rocco See COMUNIONE E LIBERAZIONE.

C Cabot, John (ca. 1450–1498), and Sebastian (ca. 1474–1557) navigator and explorer The explorer known to the English as John Cabot was born Giovanni Caboto in Genoa, became a Venetian citizen in 1476, sailed the eastern Mediterranean Sea in the service of Venetian trade, and journeyed at great risk to Mecca before going to England, probably in the 1480s. Like CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS, Cabot believed that the rich lands of the East could be reached directly by sailing west over the Atlantic Ocean, but Cabot intended to use England as a springboard. From England he sailed to Iceland and Greenland in search of fish before receiving a patent from King Henry VII in 1496 to explore the Atlantic Ocean farther west. He reached the coast of North America in a first voyage (1497) and returned a year later to carry on further exploration. It is likely that in his 1498 voyage he sailed as far south as Chesapeake Bay. It is also likely that he died on this second voyage. The fate of this second expedition is unknown, but the English crown invoked it to justify its territorial claims to North America. Thus, John Cabot has been called the real discoverer of North America. John’s son, Sebastian Cabot, continued his father’s exploration in his unsuccessful search for the Northwest Passage to the Far East. The two Cabots were part of the diaspora of pilots from the Italian peninsula who used their maritime skills in pursuit of fame and fortune on Europe’s new Atlantic frontier in the service of foreign powers.

Cadorna, Luigi (1850–1928) army general and chief of staff in World War I General Luigi Cadorna was the son of General Raffaele Cadorna (1815–97) who had led Italian troops in the taking of Rome in September 1870. This Piedmontese family had a military tradition of long standing. Luigi Cadorna was commissioned in 1868. In July 1914 he was appointed army chief of staff and commanded the Italian army in WORLD WAR I until forced to resign in November 1917 in the wake of the CAPORETTO disaster. Self-assured to a fault, impervious to criticism, and a strict disciplinarian, Cadorna brooked no interference with his command from anyone, including government ministers whose support he needed to carry on with his duties. He was a competent and careful organizer, but his approach to war, like that of most generals at the time, was traditional and unimaginative. Under his command the army maintained a steady pressure on the Austrians and insisted on launching frontal attacks against entrenched positions. The territorial gains produced by those tactics came at an enormous cost in lives. Cadorna held the army together with strict discipline, sacked subordinate commanders for even minor infractions, and acted with little regard for the morale of troops. When the enemy caught the army by surprise at Caporetto and forced a retreat with huge losses in lives and prisoners, Cadorna committed the capital error of publicly blaming the disaster on the troops. The government sacked him unceremoniously, replacing him with the more

173

174 Cadorna, Raffaele

tactful ARMANDO DIAZ. A military inquest (1919) faulted Cadorna on several accounts, including disregarding intelligence of enemy plans, poor deployment of troops, and lack of cooperation with civilian authorities. But Cadorna’s defenders argued that the charges against him were politically motivated to disparage the army. They praised Cadorna for his patriotism, pointed to his successes before Caporetto, and the effectiveness of the resistance that he organized in the days after the rout. The case divided public opinion for many years, with nationalists strongly supporting Cadorna against his critics from the Left and the liberal center. The Fascist government promoted Cadorna to the rank of army marshal in 1924 in an effort to placate the army and the political Right.

Cadorna, Raffaele (1889–1973) army general and formal commander of the resistance in World War II Raffaele, the son of LUIGI CADORNA, kept his distance from the Fascist regime and, like most army officers, remained loyal to the monarchy and King VICTOR EMMANUEL III. Cadorna followed the royal court to southern Italy when the king abandoned Rome in September 1943, worked closely with the Allies, and led Italian regular troops who took the field against the Germans in 1944. That same year he was parachuted into northern Italy to take command of the armed RESISTANCE. He took steps to organize the fighters along military lines, curb the independent authority of field commanders, and neutralize the political influence of communists. Thanks to his organizational efforts, military units of the resistance were able to take control of northern cities from the retreating Germans in the final days of WORLD WAR II prior to the arrival of the Allies. After the war he served as chief of staff of the armed forces (1945–47) and as senator (1948–63). His writings are an important source of information on military and political aspects of the resistance movement.

Caffè (Il) See VERRI, PIETRO. Cafiero, Carlo See ANARCHISM; MALATESTA, ERRICO.

Cagliostro, Alessandro (1743–1795) adventurer, impostor, and confidence man popular in high society Alessandro, count of Cagliostro, was the assumed name of the Sicilian-born Giuseppe Balsamo, an adventurer who made a name for himself throughout Europe as a magician and physician allegedly possessing miraculous curative powers. His wife, Lorenza Feliciani, was his capable accomplice. The renown that he acquired gave him access to the highest social circles, which accepted him in spite his lowborn status. Cagliostro promised to raise the spirits of the dead, transform base metals into gold, claimed to have spoken with Egyptian pharaohs and to have witnessed the crucifixion of Christ, Nero’s burning of Rome, and crusaders setting off for the Holy Land. His displays of hypnotic power were popular events that drew crowds. He introduced a new Egyptian rite in FREEMASONRY, and membership in that brotherhood facilitated his movements in Europe and opened doors to exclusive circles in London, Paris, Rome, and St. Petersburg. In Paris he was implicated in the Affair of the Queen’s Necklace, which contributed to discrediting the French monarchy on the eve of the FRENCH REVOLUTION. He left Paris just ahead of the police. Arrested in Rome in 1789, he was tried, found guilty of founding a Masonic lodge in the city, and sentenced to die. The government commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, which he served to the end of his days in the remote fortress of St. Leo. He refused the offer of holy sacraments on his deathbed. His adventurous life offers an intriguing look at the side of ENLIGHTENMENT culture that was fascinated by the supernatural, magic, mysticism, and the irrational.

Calixtus III 175

Cairoli, Benedetto (1825–1889) Risorgimento patriot and prime minister Benedetto Cairoli was born in Pavia to Carlo Cairoli (1777–1849) and Adelaide Bono (1806–71), the first of five sons, all patriots active in the movement for national unification. All but Benedetto died fighting for the cause. The mother became a symbol of patriotic motherhood. Benedetto fought against the Austrians in 1848, conspired with GIUSEPPE MAZZINI in the 1850s as a republican, but made his peace with the Piedmontese monarchy after the failure of republican conspiracies. After a period of exile in Switzerland, he returned to Italy in 1854. He fought as a volunteer under the command of GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI in 1859 and 1860. A member of the national parliament for the LIBERAL LEFT from 1861 until his death, he criticized his own party and Prime Minister AGOSTINO DEPRETIS for the slow pace of political reform. He confronted difficult issues in his three appointments as prime minister between 1878 and 1881. A moment of popularity came his way when he was credited with saving the life of King UMBERTO I in November 1878 by standing between him and an assailant, suffering a knife wound in the process. Nationalists censured his cautious foreign policy, blaming him for Italy’s failure to demand territorial gains at the Congress of Berlin (1878) and for the French seizure of Tunisia (1881). On the other hand, Austria held him responsible for nationalist agitation over TRENT and TRIESTE. Cairoli resigned under fire from all sides, and his political reputation never recovered from these setbacks. Admired for his courage and selfless patriotism, he has been regarded as an ineffectual politician.

Calabria Calabria (pop. 2,050,000) occupies the tip or “toe” at the southernmost extreme of the peninsula. It borders on the region of Basilicata on the north; the Tyrrhenian Sea lies to its west, the Ionian Sea to its east, and it is separated from the

island of SICILY on the south by the Strait of Messina. Its complex topography is dominated by mountains, which cover most of its surface. In this part of the peninsula, the APENNINES are known as the Sila Mountains, with peaks that reach almost one and a quarter miles (2,000 meters) in elevation. The southernmost part of the mountain range is known as the Aspromonte (Harsh Mount), a name that reflects the jagged, impervious nature of the land. Although precipitation is plentiful in the mountains, rapid runoff into rivers and torrents that empty quickly into the sea makes for chronic water shortages. Historically, its system of land tenure consisted of many very small properties alongside very large estates (latifundia) owned by absentee landlords, run by middlemen, and worked by ill-paid day laborers. Land reform has broken up the large estates, but agriculture has not flourished. The production of wheat, the traditional commercial staple of Calabrian agriculture, has declined. Its most valuable products are now olives, citrus fruit, wine grapes, sugar beets, and potatoes. Industry (construction materials, food processing, textiles, paper, and wood products) is underdeveloped, and small firms are the norm. The region has enormous tourist potential in its beaches and mountains. There are also historical and artistic treasures left behind by the region’s many rulers over the centuries (Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Normans, Germans, and Spaniards) that wait to be discovered by visitors. As in the other regions of the underdeveloped South, government is the largest provider of jobs. The principal cities of the region are Catanzaro, Cosenza, and the regional capital of Reggio Calabria, which was completely destroyed by an earthquake in 1908 and rebuilt along modern lines. Emigration abroad and to the industrial cities of northern Italy siphoned off approximately 1 million people from this region between the 1870s and 1970s. Since then, the population outflow has diminished.

Calixtus III See BORGIA FAMILY.

176 Calvi, Roberto

Calvi, Roberto See BANCO AMBROSIANO, SCANDAL OF.

Calvino, Italo (1923– ) author Born in Havana, Cuba, to Italian parents working on the island as agronomists, Calvino returned to Italy with his family in 1925, and he was raised in the town of San Remo on the Italian Riviera. He studied agronomy at the University of Turin, where his father was professor of tropical agriculture. Calvino served in the paramilitary Fascist youth organization and in the Italian occupation of France in World War II. He joined the anti-Fascist RESISTANCE in 1943 and the Italian Communist Party (PCI) in 1944. He left the PCI in 1957 to protest the Soviet invasion of Hungary. Since then, he has been leery of espousing political causes, but continues to view events from a generally left-wing perspective. His widely read novels show a whimsical imagination, avoid realistic representations, and conform to no political school. Calvino’s first novel, Il sentiero dei nidi del ragno (The path to the spider’s nest, 1947), shows that his intellectual nonconformism is of long standing. It presents the resistance movement, a sacred icon of the political Left, through the eyes of a child who cannot comprehend the issues of the adult world. The novel conveys the message that the movement attracted participants who themselves had no clear perception of what they were fighting for. The failure of the resistance to revolutionize Italian society, deplored by the Italian Left, becomes more understandable from this perspective. Calvino often sets his novels in the past, using lightly sketched historical background for exotic effect. Il visconte dimezzato (The cloven viscount, 1952) portrays a 17th-century aristocrat who returns from the Turkish wars split in two by a cannon ball. The good half fights against the bad half until the two are sewn together again after fighting a duel over a woman. The viscount is thus restored to his normal condition, but without deriving any notice-

Italo Calvino (Library of Congress)

able intellectual or emotional improvement from his ordeal. In Il Barone rampante (The baron in the trees, 1957), Calvino looks at the Enlightenment, French Revolution, and Napoleonic period through the eyes of a nobleman who chooses to sit out these historical events in a tree. These last two novels, and a third one entitled Il cavaliere inesistente (The nonexistent knight, 1959), have been published in English translation as part of a trilogy entitled Our Ancestors (1980). The tone of detachment and ironic pessimism that permeates these and other writings is part of Calvino’s style. He has derived inspiration in part from popular folklore, finding it a rich source of fantastic characters and plots. The result was his retelling of folktales in the splendid collection entitled Italian Folktales (1980), which became an American best-seller.

Campania 177

Camerini, Mario See DE SICA, VITTORIO. Camorra See MAFIA.

rupted the publication of his works. With his farreaching interests, vision of the world of learning as a unified whole, and faith in the value of direct experience, Campanella sums up and concludes the course of the RENAISSANCE.

Campanella, Tommaso (1568–1639) philosopher and religious dissident This Dominican friar, philosopher, visionary, and political agitator, who confronted the most controversial issues of his time and acted on his beliefs, was regarded as intolerably radical and dangerous by religious and secular authorities in his time. He continued to speak out in spite of torture and imprisonment, eventually gaining recognition for the originality and brilliance of his ideas and leaving a legacy of daring philosophical speculation and social thinking. Campanella was born to poor parents (his father was a cobbler) in the region of Calabria. He was baptized Giovan Domenico (Tommaso was the name he took on as a Dominican) and studied philosophy as part of his religious training. From his earliest writings, he stood out as a critic of the Aristotelian tradition that dominated medieval learning. Arrested in Naples in 1592 on charges of consorting with the devil and showing contempt for the church, Campanella chose to run away rather than retract his philosophical views. Pursuing him in Rome and Venice, the INQUISITION forced his return to Calabria in 1598. Campanella saved his own life by feigning insanity, but spent the next 27 years in prison. In his imprisonment he wrote profusely, including the piece for which he is best remembered, the description of an imaginary society in Città del sole (The city of the sun, 1602). This classic of utopian literature describes an ideal city free from human vices, based on common ownership of property, ruled by a philosopher-king, and peopled by an educated, virtuous citizenry. Campanella was freed in 1626, went to Rome where he was befriended by Pope URBAN VIII, and left Italy for Paris in 1634. In Paris he found a warm welcome at court and in intellectual circles. Death in the refuge of the French capital inter-

Campania The region of Campania (pop. 5,781,000) is a key region of the South. It borders the regions of LATIUM to the northwest, MOLISE to the north, PUGLIA to the northeast, and BASILICATA to the south. Its complicated topography divides essentially into a large coastal plain and a mountainous interior. The APENNINE range is less rugged in this region than in the north, but is still impervious enough to isolate the populations of the interior from those of the coastal plain. Campania links the southern regions with central and northern Italy by road and railroad. It is a hub of maritime communications, has a well-developed agriculture, and a major industrial center around the capital city of NAPLES. The mild climate of the coastal areas, fertile volcanic soil, and diversity of products explain its ancient designation as Campania Felix. Its principal cities and provincial capitals are Naples, Avellino, Benevento, Caserta, and Salerno. Campania has the highest population density in the country due to intensive urban concentration in the capital city and its environs. Rural districts have seen a major exodus of people to Naples, cities of the North, and abroad. Native Samnite populations, who contested Roman rule in southern Italy, Greeks, Romans, Lombards, Byzantines, Normans, and Spaniards have inhabited the region in the course of history. Each has left a distinctive legacy in the architecture, dialects, and customs of the region. Evidence of the opulence of some ancient settlements can be seen in the Greek temples of Paestum and the excavated parts of Roman Pompeii and Herculaneum, buried by an eruption of the still active volcano of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79. The height of the volcano changes with each eruption; at last count it stood at 4,196 feet. The seaside town of Amalfi was the first independent

178 campanilismo

commune to achieve commercial importance. In the 11th century it rivaled GENOA and PISA, controlled the western Mediterranean routes, and traded with the Near East, North Africa, and Spain. Norman rule put an end to Amalfi’s independence and introduced feudalism to the region, with lasting consequences for its economic and political development. The Norman monarchs and their successors up to the unification of Italy in 1860 maintained a system of government in which the court at Naples shared power with families of the nobility that controlled the countryside. Naples was the first southern city to benefit from laws to encourage industrialization (1907). Some of the bloodiest fighting of WORLD WAR II occurred in this region on the beaches of Salerno and around the town and abbey of Monte Cassino in 1943–44.

more powerful neighbor like Florence. Similarly, strong identification with the local community would give concrete meaning to the idea of a nation once the incorporation of the community in the national state was an accepted fact. For many Italians, the local community was and remains the only setting in which they can be active participants in public affairs. In other words, campanilismo is not the same as parochialism. While parochialism implies closure to the outside world, campanilismo can be a way of connecting with the outside world. Questions remain about the future of campanilismo: As power shifts from local to national and international centers, the outside world imposes foreign fashions and models, and means of global communication reach to the grass roots of society.

Campoformio, Treaty of See DALMATIA; campanilismo The term campanilismo describes the intense feeling of identification and loyalty that Italians feel toward the local community. The term derives from campanile (bell tower), traditionally the highest and most visible physical feature of the Italian town, and therefore the symbol of the town itself. In the Italian lexicon, the term paesano, describing a fellow townsman, stands next in line to parente (relative) in terms of attachment and identification. The paese is a shared ground for social events, business activities, and religious and political rituals. Italian emigrants in far-off places maintain ties among themselves based on the town of origin. The reality of campanilismo as a distinctive component of Italian culture is seldom questioned, but its significance is a subject of debate. The common view that campanilismo was an obstacle to national unity seems mistaken. Often it was precisely the identification and attachment to the local community, be it village, town, or city, that facilitated identification with the Italian nation as a way of surmounting subnational divisions and rivalries. A citizen of Siena or Pisa might prefer the authority of a national government to that of a

NAPOLEON I; VENICE.

Canaletto (1697–1768) (Antonio Canal) Venetian painter notable for the documentary character of his works The Venetian painter Antonio Canal, known as Canaletto, is notable chiefly for his depictions of Venetian scenes (vedute). Much admired for the realism of his paintings, which reproduce faithfully the striking architecture of the city, Canaletto found a ready market for his scenes among well-to-do visitors from abroad, who bought his paintings as souvenirs of the city. Because of their realism, his paintings document not only the appearance of the city but also the fashions, rituals, and social customs of his time. His skill as a designer, mastery of perspective, feeling for color, and delicate touch made him internationally popular. He was both an artistic and a commercial success. He was especially admired in England where he lived and worked from 1746 to 1756, and where some of his best works can be seen today. He is not to be confused with his apprentice and nephew Bernardo Bellotto

Cantù, Cesare 179

(1720–80), who was also called Canaletto. Bellotto was an even more prolific painter than his uncle, whose style he copied. Bellotto worked from London to Warsaw, and his works show up in collections across the continent.

Cannizzaro, Stanislao See SCIENCE. Canova, Antonio (1757–1822) Venetian sculptor who catered to the neoclassical taste of the Enlightenment Inspired by the art of ancient Greece and Rome, which he studied from samples found in the house where he was born, Canova strove for purity and simplicity of line in reaction to the convoluted style of the ROCOCO. Working mostly in Rome and Naples, Canova sculpted mythological figures, the tombs of popes and other prominent personages, busts and statues of NAPOLEON I and his family. Napoleon admired his art and commissioned many works from him. Canova’s nude statue of Napoleon’s sister Pauline (see BORGHESE FAMILY) reveals Canova’s art at its sensuous best. A shrewd marketer of his talent, Canova was successful artistically and commercially.

Cantù, Cesare (1804–1895) patriotic writer and educator This Lombard writer set out to reach and educate a large public with historical works and novels that preached the ethic of personal responsibility and self-help. He joined Mazzini’s YOUNG ITALY but did not play an active part in it. Of liberal sentiments, Cantù shied away from political conspiracy and radical ideologies. His Catholic faith prevented him from actively opposing or criticizing papal politics. He believed that national independence would come about gradually with the evolution of existing institutions. For his involvement in the Mazzinian movement, Cantù was arrested and spent some time in jail in 1833–34. His novel Margherita

Antonio Canova (Library of Congress)

Pusterla (1833), set in 14th-century Milan, idealized medieval culture based on local attachments and Christian values, the loss of which he blamed on the rise of the tyrannical government. His most ambitious work was a multivolume history of the world, Storia univerale (1836–42), which brought him fame and commercial success. After his brush with the law, Cantù avoided political entanglements. He deplored the rift between PIUS IX and the national movement, and the conflict of CHURCH AND STATE. In his later writings he addressed the social question as a moderate who sought harmony in the workplace. His novel Portafoglio d’un operaio (Dossier of a worker, 1871) told the story of a worker who made his way in life by being industrious, sober, and devoted to his family. Like the contemporary novels of Samuel Smiles, it emphasized the importance of honesty and personal

180 Capello, Bianca

responsibility, and the dangers that political activism and radical ideologies posed for workers. Cantù urged employers to take a personal interest in the welfare of workers, and dedicated his novel to ALESSANDRO ROSSI, the most paternalistic employer of his generation. Cantù served briefly in parliament (1860–61), but his real commitment was to educating with his writings. He belongs to the ranks of intellectuals who sought to bridge the gap between ordinary people and the intelligentsia. A prolific writer, Cantù put his faith in gradual progress, Christian resignation, and the work ethic.

Capello, Bianca (1548–1587) grand duchess of Tuscany Born to a family of the Venetian aristocracy, Capello shocked her contemporaries by eloping at age 15 with a penniless Florentine bank clerk, presumably in rebellion against the rigid seclusion that was the lot of upper-class Venetian women. Her outraged father had her declared an outlaw but she found protection in FLORENCE, where she lived unhappily, attending to domestic chores in the household of her in-laws. Her beauty caught the eye of Francesco de’ Medici (see MEDICI FAMILY), heir to the Tuscan throne, who publicly made her his mistress. Her husband was mysteriously assassinated (1569). Francesco, who became grand duke of Tuscany in 1574, married her in 1578 after his own wife had died in childbirth. In her new role as grand duchess, Bianca worked successfully to ease the political rivalry between Florence and Venice. It was one of her great disappointments that she was never able to produce an heir to the throne, and that her attempt to pass off another’s baby as the desired heir was quickly discovered. As mistress and wife, Bianca held a brilliant court that attracted the best and brightest of Florentine society. Many prominent Florentine families resented her as an outsider and protested her marriage to the grand duke. The couple died under suspicious circumstances within two days of one another. She was refused honorable

burial, and her body was cast in a common grave. Rumors of a deliberate poisoning were never substantiated. Writers of later generations have embroidered profusely on her experiences. Bianca Capello’s adventurous life, assertiveness, and courage to follow her own inclinations have made her a romantic heroine and a symbol of feminine emancipation.

Caporetto, Battle of This WORLD WAR I battle takes its name from the extreme northern town of Caporetto, where Austrian and German troops broke through the Italian front line on October 24, 1917. Within a few days of the breakthrough, the Italian troops were in disorderly retreat. They regrouped along the Piave River some four weeks later, but by then their casualties numbered about 10,000 dead and 30,000 wounded. Some 300,000 were prisoners in the hands of the enemy and 350,000 had become separated from their units in the chaos of the retreat. About one-third of Italy’s 1.8 million troops were knocked out of action by the AustroGerman offensive. In addition, the Italians lost more than half of their artillery and machine guns, and an enormous quantity of supplies. That the most serious defeat suffered by the Italian army in any war did not result in complete collapse was due to the tough fight put up by units that were still operational, and to the inability of the Austrians to exploit their initial success. British and French troops, who arrived after the Italians had stopped the advance, had a positive effect on morale. The rout had major military and political repercussions. ARMANDO DIAZ replaced LUIGI CADORNA as commander in chief, and VITTORIO EMANUELE ORLANDO replaced PAOLO BOSELLI as prime minister. The new leaders took steps to improve the morale of soldiers and civilians, and to mobilize the economy for all-out resistance. Public opinion swung behind the war effort with renewed determination. New draftees (the “class of 1899”) replenished the ranks and were called upon to carry on to victory. In the long term, however, Caporetto left a legacy of recriminations

Caracciolo, Domenico, marquis of Villamarina 181

that embittered the political scene, until they were silenced by the Fascist dictatorship.

Capponi, Gino (1792–1876) liberal patriot, reformer, and educator This member of one of the most prominent families of the Florentine aristocracy was educated in Vienna and Florence, frequented the Tuscan court during Napoleonic times and in the RESTORATION, traveled widely in Italy and Europe to acquaint himself with the latest educational methods, and was a founder of the Antologia, the Florentine journal that promoted economic and educational reforms. A political moderate, Capponi believed in a filosofia del buon senso (philosophy of common sense) that avoided generalizations and served as a guide to concrete reforms. Intimately religious, he claimed that Christianity stood for charity, equality, and human dignity, but denied that it could have any political content or affiliation. As a historian of medieval and Renaissance Italy and of Christianity he insisted on the importance of objectivity and rejected the idea that the study of history could serve the interests of the moment. Of scholarly temperament and blind at the age of 40, Capponi played a limited role in public affairs in 1848. As an independent intellectual, he attracted and inspired the most progressive and reform-minded elements of his time, casting a cultural influence far greater than his limited public role would suggest.

Capuana, Luigi See VERISMO. Capuchins See CATHOLIC REFORMATION. carabinieri The military corps of the carabinieri was founded in 1814 as part of the army of the Kingdom of SARDINIA. It was conceived as a lightly armed, highly mobile police force equipped with the lat-

est precision weapon, the carbine, from which the corps derives its name. It is a fully militarized police force of about 80,000 in peacetime, capable of carrying out full-scale military operations, commanded by a regular army general, and subject to military discipline. The carabinieri are under the jurisdiction of the ministry of the interiors in peacetime and under the ministry of defense in wartime. Its policing duties include patrolling the countryside, securing military installations, fighting organized crime, conducting internal surveillance, carrying out rescue missions by land, air, and sea, recovering stolen art works, and apprehending art thieves. In wartime the carabinieri serve as military police. Its description as the Arma Benemerita (Deserving Corps) reflects the general respect that the corps has earned for its discipline, concern for the safety and rights of citizens, and its apolitical character. The corrazzieri (cuirrassiers) are a special unit of the corps that guards the head of state and the QUIRINAL PALACE.

Caracciolo, Domenico, marquis of Villamarina (1715–1789) Neapolitan nobleman and political reformer Caracciolo was born in Spain, studied law, and served as Neapolitan ambassador to Turin (1754–64), London (1764–71), and Paris (1771–81). Influenced by ENLIGHTENMENT ideas, Caracciolo undertook administrative and political reforms in SICILY, where he served as the king’s viceroy (1781–86). He suppressed the INQUISITION, closed monasteries and guilds, taxed clerical properties, and curtailed religious festivals. He ran into severe resistance when he attacked the fiscal and jurisdictional privileges of the Sicilian nobility, which successfully resisted his efforts. Called by the king to Naples to serve as prime minister (1786–89), he encountered the hostility of Queen MARIE CAROLINE and her favorite, JOHN ACTON. Caracciolo died before the monarchy’s fearful reaction to the FRENCH REVOLUTION ended attempts at administrative and political reform.

182 Caravaggio

sense of piety rooted in everyday life, but it may also be that he was driven to create scandal with his paintings, as he did with his actions. Whatever his motives, there is no doubt that his work forces itself on the attention of the viewer. Massive bodies thrust into the foreground, expressive gestures, the contrast of light and shadow are element of his style. Caravaggio dominated Italian painting and cast his influence throughout Europe, due in part to a host of imitators and copyists. Dutch painters, including Rubens and Rembrandt, were particularly affected by his striving for naturalism.

Carboneria

Caravaggio (Library of Congress)

Caravaggio (1573–1610) unconventional painter known for his naturalistic effects Michelangelo Merisi took his art name from the Lombard town of Caravaggio, where he was born. The son of a poor family, trained in Milan, he worked in Rome, Naples, Malta, and Sicily. His violent, quarrelsome temper landed him in trouble with the authorities wherever he went. He died on his way to Rome from a wound received in a brawl, leaving behind an artistic legacy of some 40 paintings. Reacting against the excesses of MANNERISM, Caravaggio strove to paint in a more natural fashion, depicting mythical and religious figures as ordinary folk engaged in worldly tasks, as when he depicted the executioners of Saint Peter as street toughs. Critics have seen Caravaggio as expressing a new

most important of the secret societies agitating for Italian independence The secret society of Carboneria emerged as the most important element in the secret political opposition to constituted government after 1815. The romantic imagination pictured the carbonari as mysterious conspirators practicing secret rites. The origins of the name, usually translated as “charcoal burners,” are obscure. Conceivably, the term may refer to Masonic rituals practiced by the members, or to the actual occupation of the first carbonari, or to the secret nightly meetings held in forests in the light of charcoal fires. The secret society was formed in Naples in 1807–10 during the reign of JOACHIM MURAT, probably by Neapolitan military officers opposed to NAPOLEON I who wanted some form of representative government. During the Napoleonic period, the society may have enjoyed the covert support of Austria and England in their struggle to topple Napoleonic rule. When Austria replaced France as the dominant power in the peninsula after the CONGRESS OF VIENNA, the carbonari turned against Austria. Their moderate agenda differed from that of the more radical JACOBINS who preceded them and were still active in the political underground. The carbonari sought change by winning the confidence of or putting pressure on monarchs and other influential people, in the spirit and

Cardano, Girolamo 183

manner of 18th-century FREEMASONRY. Constitutional monarchy, limited voting rights, parliamentary government, and access to public office by qualified people were their objectives. They conspired, staged coups, and resorted to street action, but seldom drew on people from outside their own ranks. It is possible that the innermost councils of Carboneria harbored republican convictions, but most members favored constitutional monarchy, and limitation of voting rights to people of property and education; they feared popular initiatives. In their view, national independence could be achieved without unifying the peninsula politically. They preferred to work with established monarchs and avoided attacking the privileged orders of society, with the exception of the clergy. The group’s political program was moderate, but internally the Carboneria was more open and democratic than most other secret societies. Most members were middle-class professionals, marginally employed intellectuals, and military officers, but the membership encompassed a cross-section of society from aristocrats to workers, and included some women. The members regarded one another as buoni cugini (good cousins), regardless of social extraction. The secret network spread from Naples to the rest of Italy and into France, connected with other secret societies, and orchestrated various uprisings starting in 1817. In the 1820s the conspirator FILIPPO MICHELE BUONARROTI centralized control of the Carboneria in his own hands and reorganized the network on an international basis. The political effectiveness of the Carboneria is a matter of dispute, but it seems that its membership reached the considerable figure of about 60,000. Governments were alarmed by its activities, repressed it where they could, and waged an intensive propaganda campaign against it. The carbonari played prominent roles in the REVOLUTIONS OF 1820–21 and 1830. The failure of these revolutions, the passing of the older generation, emergence of new leaders, and spread of more radical ideologies diminished the appeal of Carboneria after 1830. Giuseppe Mazz-

ini’s YOUNG ITALY challenged it for control of the national movement. There was little left of Carboneria by 1848, when popular revolutions broke out in most parts of Italy. A few cells survived into the 1850s and 1860s, when the movement for national independence was out in the open and looked toward the new figures of CAVOUR and GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI.

Cardano, Girolamo (1501–1576) late Renaissance scholar and natural philosopher Born in Pavia and raised in Milan, Cardano was a mathematician, physician, astrologer, and student of magic. The combination of scientific rigor and belief in the supernatural makes him one of the most intriguing figures of the RENAISSANCE. At the universities of Pavia , Padua, and Bologna he made a name for himself as a pioneer in the development of algebra, and for his mechanical inventions, and knowledge of medicine. Cardano lived at a time when the boundaries between what we think of as science and magic were blurred. He saw both as legitimate quests to attain a better understanding of nature. In his view, science was a way of studying measurable phenomena, while magic sought to make sense of and control phenomena that escaped measurement. Sensation and human fate were among the latter. His special interest was astrology, which he practiced by applying mathematics to the behavior of celestial bodies. He developed precise tables to ascertain the conjuncture of celestial and terrestrial phenomena, in order to predict the fate of individuals and the course of human events. He defended astrology against its many critics, insisting that its failures were due to the inadequate training and shoddy practices of many of its practitioners, not to the nature of the subject. His suggestion that Christ’s divine powers were in some measure attributable to astrological influences exposed him to charges of impiety. As his self-confidence grew with his fame, Cardano came to think of himself as uniquely qualified to understand and control

184 Carducci, Giosuè

natural processes. For his own self-assessment, see his autobiography, De propria vita (The book of my life, 1643, English translation 1930 and 2002).

shows sensitivity for matters of the spirit and avoids the rhetorical emphasis that mars some of his poetry. The ultimate international accolade came a few months before his death when he received the Nobel Prize in literature.

Carducci, Giosuè (1835–1907) major poet of the postunification period The most celebrated Italian poet of the postunification period was born in Tuscany, graduated from the Scuola Normale of Pisa (1856), taught in secondary schools, and published Rime, his first book of poetry, in 1857. From 1860 to 1904 he taught at the University of Bologna. He later organized his poetical writings into chronological and stylistic groups entitled Juvenilia (1850–60), Levia Gravia (1861–71), Giambi ed epodi (1867–79), Rime nuove (1861–87), Odi barbare (1877–89), and Rime e ritmi (1887–99). Reacting to what he regarded as the degeneration of romantic poetry into mere sentimentality, Carducci returned to the classical style that represented to him the only authentic Italian literary tradition. But for Carducci classicism was not merely a matter of style. For him, classicism meant vigorous engagement with the issues of the day, which is what he did with his poetry to instill in his fellow countrymen the sense of civic responsibility that he deemed appropriate to the age of national independence. Never a cloistered figure, he engaged vigorously with all the issues of the day, using his academic post to broadcast his views and form a retinue of disciples who continued his secular apostolate. Carducci tried to clear the ground of cultural deadwood, railing against the influence of religion, which he equated with the most retrograde superstition. In the provocative Inno a Satana (Hymn to Satan, 1863), he hailed Satan as the symbol of human revolt and the liberation of reason from the tyranny of authority. His anticlerical and strongly republican sentiments mellowed with the passage of time, until an open profession of monarchist sentiments brought his conversion to a logical conclusion and led to his acceptance as the authoritative voice of unified Italy. In his later poetry he often

Carli, Gian Rinaldo (1720–1795) economist and Enlightenment reformer Born in Capodistria (now Kopen in Slovenia) when it was under Venetian rule, Carli emerged as one of the leading figures of the Italian ENLIGHTENMENT. After teaching at the University of Padua, he moved to Milan in the service of the Austrian government. He was one of the first intellectuals to take up the public campaign against belief in magic and witchcraft, arguing that observation and reason were the only reliable foundations of knowledge. He is remembered mostly for his economic writings, in which he questioned the physiocratic faith in free trade for agricultural products and argued for state control and regulation of manufacturing and trade to protect developing enterprises. As economic minister of Milan under Austrian rule, Carli carried out a land census (catasto) to give government officials and landowners objective data on land values for more equitable taxation. Feared at first by landowners, the land census revealed its usefulness when it resulted in increased valuations without higher taxes and promoted more efficient use of land resources. Carli also oversaw the minting of new coins to eliminate debased currency. To encourage public acceptance of vaccination against smallpox and show that the procedure was not dangerous, Carli staged the public vaccination of his son. A faithful servant of the HABSBURG dynasty, Carli saw no incompatibility between being part of the Habsburg multinational empire and asserting the uniqueness and unity of Italian culture, which he defended in the essay Della patria degli italiani (On the Italian fatherland), published in the Milanese review Il Caffè in 1765. The essay was not well received by the cosmopolitan intellectuals of Milan. PIETRO VERRI challenged Carli on

Carnera, Primo 185

this and other issues. Carli was deeply suspicious of theorists and abstractions. His pragmatic bent and his interest in concrete remedies for specific problems clashed with the search for broad principles of reform that engaged most of his contemporaries.

Carli, Guido See BANCA D’ITALIA.

and turn it over to the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, thus putting an end to Lucca’s existence as an independent state. In Parma he ruled as Carlo II, signed a military pact with Austria, and resigned in March 1849 in favor of his son Carlo III, who was assassinated in 1854 under mysterious circumstances. Carlo Lodovico lived out the rest of his life in quiet and easy retirement. Easygoing and likable, he did not deem himself born to political life.

Carlo III di Borbone See PARMA, CITY OF. Carnera, Primo (1906–1967) Carlo Lodovico di Borbone (1799–1883) (or Ludovico) king of Etruria (1803–1807), duke of Lucca (1824–1847), duke of Parma (1847–1849) This member of the Spanish BOURBON family reigned as a minor as king of Etruria (Tuscany) from 1803 to 1807 under the regency of his mother, Marie Louise of Bourbon. NAPOLEON I deposed them for failing to honor the trade blockade against Great Britain. The CONGRESS OF VIENNA assigned the Duchy of PARMA to his mother, but allowed Napoleon’s second wife, Marie Louise of Habsburg, to govern that duchy until her death. In the meantime, the Bourbons were assigned the Duchy of LUCCA, which Carlo Lodovico’s mother ruled until her death in 1824. Lodovico succeeded his mother as duke of Lucca and governed that city until 1847, when he took over the Duchy of Parma at the death of the Habsburg, Marie Louise. Lodovico’s rule in Lucca was distinguished by his easygoing style of government, love of leisurely pastimes, and general bonhomie. He permitted Protestants to worship and allowed them to build their own chapel at Bagni di Lucca, partly to encourage foreign tourism. His weakness for the company of gamblers and adventurers did not go unnoticed. Conservatives regarded him as liberal, but the liberals of Lucca were not won over by his moderate politics. Organized demonstrations against him on the eve of the REVOLUTIONS of 1848 prompted him to leave the city in great haste

world heavyweight boxing champion and national symbol The only Italian boxer to hold the world heavyweight title, Carnera was born into a family of modest means in the Friuli region, learned carpentry, and practiced his trade in France as a teenager. Having impressive size and strength (he was 6’ 9” tall and weighed 250–270 pounds), Carnera began his career as a circus strongman. His boxing debut occurred in 1928 and he quickly became a popular attraction in France and England. In 1930–33 he repeatedly toured the United States to establish his credentials as a legitimate contender for the heavyweight title. While the reactions of the press were mixed, Carnera was an immediate success with ItalianAmericans. He took the world heavyweight title from Jack Sharkey in June 1933. Carnera’s success also caught the attention of Fascist leaders in Italy, including BENITO MUSSOLINI, who congratulated him on his victory. The Fascist press hailed him as an example of Italian physical prowess and daring. Flattered by the attention and motivated by genuine patriotism, Carnera praised the Fascist regime and donned the black shirt. The official adulation stopped after Max Baer took the title from him in June 1934. Although he remained personally popular in Italy, his boxing career went into irreversible decline after he lost to Joe Louis in June 1935. His high earnings from boxing were mostly diverted into the pockets of managers and middlemen. He returned to Italy to pursue a brief

186 Carracci, Annibale

and unremarkable career in Italian cinema. He married in 1939, spent the war years in Italy, returned to the United States in July 1946, and became an American citizen in 1953. His success as a professional wrestler in the 1950s brought him the financial security that had eluded him as a boxer. Carnera’s boxing career was dogged by rumors of fixed fights and control by shady crime figures. Some of his encounters were indeed fixed, as was customary in the boxing world when a promising contender was being groomed for the title. But his key career matches were apparently legitimate. A man whose fierce appearance disguised a caring and gentle disposition, Carnera prevailed as a fighter by diligence and hard work rather than by natural talent. His life was fictionalized in the film The Harder They Fall (1956).

Carracci, Annibale See RENI, GUIDO. Carta del Lavoro See CORPORATISM. Caruso, Enrico (1873–1921) opera star, singing idol, and national symbol The most admired Italian operatic singer of all time was born in Naples to a family of modest means, the only one of his mother’s first 18 children to survive (she would give birth to three more, two of whom survived childhood). He began singing in a local church and gradually won local renown for the beauty and passionate quality of his tenor voice. His success was rapid after he made his debut in 1895 in PIETRO MASCAGNI’s opera Cavalleria rusticana. He sang in all major opera houses, but his career was centered on New York’s Metropolitan Opera House. He was New York’s favorite tenor from the time of his first Metropolitan appearance in 1903 to the year of his untimely death from pleurisy. Italian-Americans idolized him, and he in turn drew them into the opera house by the thousands. Caruso popularized the Italian opera

repertory in the United States, to the dismay of the devotees of French and German opera, which dominated the American stage until his arrival. Those who did not hear him in person could appreciate him through his recordings. Caruso’s career happened to coincide with the beginning of the recording industry, and he took to the new medium seriously and enthusiastically, recording some 240 selections in the course of his career. He was the first singer to reach a vast public beyond the opera house and to bridge the gap between classical and popular music.

Casanova, Giacomo (1725–1798) adventurer, confidence man, and talented self-promoter renowned for his amorous escapades Giovanni Giacomo (or Jacopo) Casanova was born in Venice. The son of actors, he was abandoned by his mother at an early age, studied for the clergy but was expelled before being ordained, and tried his luck as a soldier and a violinist without success, before taking up the life of wandering that made his name a byword for adventure and scandal. A man of great charm, he ingratiated himself with powerful people, made his living as a confidence man, gambler, spy, and magician, usually managing to keep one step ahead of the law. Jailed in Venice for recruiting for FREEMASONRY (1755), he wrote a book about his daring escape from the infamous Piombi prison. Highly popular in Paris, he introduced the lottery to France and made a great deal of money as its director. He wrote his memoirs in French, the language of most of his writings, commenting shrewdly on figures and events of his time and making no effort to disguise his own libertine nature. Particularly proud of his amorous escapades, which he often described graphically, he probably exaggerated his success with women. He has come nevertheless to be thought of as the epitome of the seducer. Driven out of the great capitals of Europe by his unsavory reputation, he spent the last 13 years of his life

Cassa per il Mezzogiorno 187

employed as a librarian in the castle of his friend Count Waldstein in Bohemia, where he shared the servants’ quarters and grumbled about their lack of respect for him. Like his contemporary CAGLIOSTRO, Casanova personified the 18th-century stereotype of the charming, quick-witted, unscrupulous Italian who lived by stratagems, but he can also be seen more favorably as the embodiment of a secular mentality intolerant of unexamined, religiously based injunctions and restraints. His multivolume Memoirs and various abridgements of the same can be read in English editions.

Casati Law Named after Minister of Public Instruction Gabrio Casati (1798–1873) who sponsored it, this law was adopted by the Piedmontese parliament in November 1859 shortly after the annexation of Lombardy. The law, which was extended to the entire national territory after unification, established a centralized system of national education based on the Napoleonic model, in which a central ministry of education set national curricula, and teacher certification requirements, and supervised and enforced teaching and learning standards for the entire nation. Popularly elected local school boards under the control of PREFECTS were held responsible for establishing and funding public elementary schools. Only kindergartens, vocational schools, and naval and military academies were exempt from regulation. The law was criticized for requiring fundamental scholastic choices that determined careers at too young an age, the elitist nature of the secondary school curriculum, the Latin requirement that worked against students from poor backgrounds, and the sharp distinction between humanistic and technical curricula that made it all but impossible to switch from one to the other. The Casati Law remained in force with only minor revisions until 1923.

Casati, Teresa See CONFALONIERI, FEDERICO.

Caserio, Sante See ANARCHISM. Cassa per il Mezzogiorno national fund established to promote the economic development of the southern regions The Cassa per il Mezzogiorno (Fund for the South) was established by law in August 1950 to finance, plan, and implement programs for the economic development of the South. The Cassa’s initial objectives were land reclamation, water control, irrigation, road construction, and other projects specifically related to agricultural development. It was to be funded for 10 years at annual levels of 100 billion lire. In 1952 and 1957 the duration, level of funding, and scope of its activities were expanded to include industrial development, schooling, tourism, urban renewal, public health, and the construction of economic infrastructures. To speed up its operations, the Cassa was exempt from the bureaucratic red tape of other government agencies. From the mid1950s to the mid-1970s it achieved some spectacular breakthroughs. It funded the construction of modern steel mills at Bagnoli and Taranto and of chemical plants and oil refineries in the regions of Puglia and Sicily. In 1970–74 the South absorbed 32 percent of the country’s industrial investment largely as a result of public funds funneled there through the Cassa. Its projects had significant impact on local economies, but did not solve the larger problems of unemployment, emigration, inadequate schooling, and organized crime that continued to plague vast areas of the South. Its industrial investments never recovered from the setbacks caused by the oil crisis of the early 1970s. Nothing done for agriculture stopped the exodus of people from the countryside. In the meantime, the Cassa fell prey to the practices of feather-bedding, clientelism, and political manipulation that plagued the public sector. The vast sums spent in the South by the Cassa and by government ministries and bureaus to address the SOUTHERN QUESTION created a political backlash in other parts of the country. The Cassa was abolished in 1984 and its functions

188 Cassino, Battle of

assigned to a multiplicity of national, regional, and local agencies. The operating principle of the new policy is that public funds must be directed toward all depressed regions regardless of their geographic location. The South should continue to receive substantial funding commensurate with the lower levels of public spending typical of the first years of the 21st century.

Cassino, Battle of See WORLD WAR II. Castelfidardo, Battle of See CIALDINI, ENRICO.

Castelli, Benedetto See TORRICELLI, EVANGELISTA.

Casti, Giambattista (1724–1803) satirical writer and social critic This versifier and playwright delighted in satirizing the personages, manners, and pretensions of his time. Showing little inclination for the life of the celibate priest that he was ordained to be, Casti wandered throughout Europe observing and commenting on what he saw in Vienna and St. Petersburg, where he was court poet, in Milan where he lived, and in Paris where he died. His facility as a writer was exceeded only by his cynicism, which was not always misplaced. In his Poema tartaro (1778) he ridiculed the pretensions of the Russian court of Catherine II and the civilized veneer that was superimposed on Russia’s rustic culture. The men and ideas of the FRENCH REVOLUTION fared no better in his Gli animali parlanti (The talking animals), written in the 1790s but published in 1802. His talking animals imagine that they can govern themselves wisely with written constitutions, but their wicked nature triumphs over their good intentions, and they govern worse than their predecessors. NAPOLEON I paid the work the compliment of banning it. The sexual innuendo of his Novelle galanti showed him at his titillating best and gave him a

reputation as a licentious writer. His serious and downright censorious contemporary GIUSEPPE PARINI took Casti to task for his frivolous tone and tolerant attitude.

Castiglione, Baldassarre (1478–1529) courtier, diplomat, soldier, and scholar Castiglione personified the qualities of the cultured and versatile gentleman that he described in his famous book Il cortegiano (The courtier). Born near Mantua to a family of small landowners, Castiglione was educated at the courts of LODOVICO SFORZA and the GONZAGA FAMILY, where learning and chivalry were held in high regard. He later served in diplomatic capacities at court in Urbino, Mantua, and Rome. He wrote Il cortegiano between 1508 and 1516 after serving in Urbino, where the art of gentlemanly (and ladylike) behavior was cultivated with the greatest care. The book, written in polished Italian for easier access, is cast in the form of a dialogue among the men and women of the court. The ideal gentleman (courtier) must be of noble blood, loyal to the prince, skilled in the arts of war, physically fit, adept at sports, familiar with foreign languages, well read, educated in many different fields, and not overly specialized. He must display his qualities and accomplishments nonchalantly, with natural ease, as if they cost him no effort, that whole demeanor being described as sprezzatura. It will not do for a gentleman to seem overly preoccupied with anything, except possibly the preservation of his honor, which he must guard with the greatest care. Courtly ladies must be good domestic managers, well educated, and always gracious. It must be emphasized that Castiglione was describing a code of behavior considered appropriate to the noble orders of society (the courtiers), not to commoners who had to contend with the needs of daily life. Although Castiglione was clearly describing an ideal that was nowhere fully attainable, his book was translated in many languages after its publication in 1528 and served as a guide to etiquette until the 19th century. Castiglione was less fortunate than his book. He is said to have died of

Catholic Action 189

a broken heart after failing on a diplomatic mission entrusted to him by Pope CLEMENT VII.

(1858–1922), who made several recordings in Rome in 1902–03.

Castracani, Castruccio See LUCCA, CITY OF.

Castro, War of See BARBERINI FAMILY.

castrati

Cateau-Cambrésis, Treaty of

A new type of singer made its debut at the papal court in late-16th-century Rome, where the religious zeal of the CATHOLIC REFORMATION kept women off the stage. The voices of the castrati ranged from contralto and mezzo to full soprano, the unnatural tone having been secured by castration (the surgical removal of the sex glands) at age seven or eight, before the onset of puberty. Church authorities never officially endorsed the practice but allowed it to continue. What had been a religiously motivated practice soon took on a momentum of its own as castrati singers met with overwhelming popular favor, and impoverished parents sacrificed their boys to secure a better future for them. By the 18th century the castrati were the great stars of Italian OPERA. Castration did not guarantee artistic success, and indeed the overwhelming majority of the thousands of boys subjected to the operation found employment in occupations less respectable than singing. But the successful ones, like Farinelli (Carlo Broschi, 1705–82), who was considered the greatest artist of them all, were idolized throughout Europe and lavishly compensated. They were international stars of the first magnitude with popular followings similar to those of contemporary pop idols. The castrati rendered a tremendous service to music by bringing the art of singing to an unprecedented and possibly never equaled level of technical perfection. Connoisseurs found their singing particularly affecting with its combination of pathos and power. Their voice control enabled them to perform the most amazing vocal feats. Interest in the castrati waned quickly in the 19th century as women took to the stage, but castrati continued to sing in the choir of the Sistine Chapel into the early years of the 20th century. The last singing castrato was Alessandro Moreschi

(or Peace of) Signed in the French town of Cambrai on April 3, 1559, this treaty addressed some long-standing rivalries among European powers. England gave up its claims to Calais in France, and France recognized Spanish control over Milan, Naples, Sicily, and Sardinia. The French thus acknowledged the Spanish domination of the Italian peninsula. The French also withdrew from Piedmont and Savoy, restoring those territories to the rule of the HOUSE OF SAVOY, agreed that Siena should be part of the Medici state (see MEDICI FAMILY), and ceded the island of CORSICA to the Republic of GENOA. With this treaty, France gave up on the dream of controlling Italy. The House of Savoy began the slow process of Italian expansion that resulted in national unification in the 19th century. VENICE maintained its policy of neutrality and continued its losing battle against the Turks in defense of its overseas empire. Milan, Tuscany, Naples, and the Papal States were formally independent but under the direct or indirect control of Spain. The Italian states, unable to defend themselves against the greater powers, gained the protection of Spain (later replaced by Austria), and some domestic peace, but lost their independence. There would be many more wars and territorial changes in Italy before national independence, but the Treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis determined Italy’s place in the international order for the next three centuries.

Catholic Action Catholic Action is an association of lay Catholics working closely with the clergy to promote Catholic interests and values. It is an international organization whose origins can be found

190 Catholic Church

in the papal pronouncements of the 1860s encouraging the faithful to resist secular ideologies and the demands of modern states. Its precursor in Italy was the Opera dei Congressi, which PIUS X dissolved in 1903 because he deemed it too independent of clerical control. Pope BENEDICT XV established Catholic Action in Italy in 1915 to lead and coordinate the activities of various Catholic economic, political, and social organizations. Pope PIUS XI, who reorganized it, saw Catholic Action as the main secular arm of the church reaching out to school-age children with a strong cultural and spiritual message. Its expansion created a potential for conflict with the Fascist regime, which saw it as a dangerous rival in its efforts to win the hearts and minds of Italians. The regime acknowledged the legitimacy of Catholic Action in 1929, but attacked it in 1931 to gain exclusive control of all youth organizations. Catholic Action survived the confrontation by promising to concern itself with purely religious matters. Nevertheless, many figures in the Christian Democratic Party (DC) of the post-Fascist era were formed by their experiences in Catholic Action and relied on its support in their postwar campaigns. The lay character and scope of Catholic Action were restored after 1946, spawning a multiplicity of lay organizations in schooling, scouting, sports, entertainment, social welfare, and political action. It became an umbrella organization with subsidiaries in every corner of Italian society. The organizations of the political Left stood up to Catholic Action only in the heart of Italy’s “red belt.” Its organizations reached a total membership of 2.7 million at the heyday of its power in the mid-1950s. Until the 1970s Catholic Action was an important part of the political machinery of the DC, helping it to spread its message and bring out the vote, and generally playing the role of a reserve clergy. But not all its members followed the course set by the church. Some actually joined movements of the opposition, including the most radical extra-parliamentary groups of the Left. Its political importance has declined in recent years, particularly since the

demise of the DC in 1994 and the church’s retreat from direct involvement in Italian politics.

Catholic Church The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, as the Catholic Church is properly called, stands for different things. To the devout, the church is the divinely ordained institution that stands between man and God and is the sole means of salvation. In a secular frame of reference, however, the church stands for people, organizations, structures, and rituals that advance clerical interests. This is particularly true in Italy where the Catholic Church is palpably present in countless ways. Its imprint is evident on land and towns, in politics, the economy, and the way of life. To Italians, the church (la chiesa) is a daily presence with a large historical legacy. The PAPAL STATES were for centuries a politically sovereign entity in the heart of the peninsula. The PAPACY is firmly planted on Italian soil and shares ROME, the national capital, with Italy’s political leadership. Thus, in Italy, CHURCH AND STATE often compete for the same space claim allegiance from the same people. Neither the Catholic Church nor the Italian state can afford to ignore one another. Their relations require constant monitoring and adjustment. About 98 percent of Italians are nominally Catholic, and although less than one-third attend mass regularly, the overwhelming majority marry in church, have their children baptized, and are buried with religious rites. In Italy the sanctity and closeness of the family is both a religious principle and a dominant social attitude. The church exerts a cultural influence in Italy that is far greater than the level of religious observance might suggest. Such influence, however, has never gone unchallenged. Opposition to the secular role of the church has found expression in the many forms of ANTICLERICALISM. Italians have rebuffed the church in politics by voting communist by the millions and on family matters by practicing contraception and legalizing divorce and abortion.

Catholic Reformation 191

The church has responded to these and other challenges by mobilizing the clergy, organizing at the grass roots to combat secular tendencies, supporting certain political parties for reasons of opportunity or principle, and using the media to influence public opinion. The most widely distributed publication in Italy today is La Famiglia Cristiana, a religiously inspired journal that carries the word of the church to millions of households. The church constantly adjusts its tactics to confront change and promote its agenda. The changes that have diminished the influence of the church in the last 100 years are primarily economic and social. They include the decline of agriculture, the virtual disappearance of the peasantry as a social class, large-scale migrations from countryside to city and from South to North, the undermining of hierarchical relationships in the home, workplace, and civil society, and the spread of consumerism and secular entertainment. The church has responded with the reforms of Vatican II, updating its practices and rituals, reaching out to the laity, and shaping its messages to reflect more accurately the values of middle-class churchgoers. This process of aggiornamento (renewal) has not been without problems. It has alienated Catholics who remain attached to the old traditions, and generated fears that the church is moving too fast, or not fast enough. Italian Catholics are divided on such issues as the celibacy of priests and the ordination of women. In sum, the church faces the same challenges in Italy that it does in the rest of the world, with added immediacy and urgency due to physical proximity and interdependence of church and state.

Catholic Reformation religious and administrative reform of the Roman Catholic Church in the 16th and 17th centuries The term Catholic Reformation is preferred to the once common Counter-Reformation because the latter implies that the religious reforms were a reaction to the challenge of Protestantism rather

than a spontaneous development within the Catholic Church. It is true that the call for reform of the church was sounded before the rise of Protestantism. It came from humanist scholars like LORENZO VALLA and from bishops and monarchs, from lay movements and new religious orders like the Oratory of Divine Love. Popular support for GIROLAMO SAVONAROLA showed that the masses were also eager for reform. Luther’s challenge to the papacy heightened the sense of urgency, but it could not have induced the movement for reform all by itself. Pope PAUL III took the initiative soon after his election in 1534 by naming cardinals sympathetic to reform and appointing a commission to begin the process. It took 30 years for the COUNCIL OF TRENT to agree, and another 30 years before the council’s recommendations were implemented. The more visible innovations were the INDEX, the ROMAN INQUISITION, and the JESUIT ORDER. Most important was the implementation of clerical discipline from pope to bishops and bishops to lower clergy. Parish priests were held to more rigorous standards of conduct, required to involve the laity in church activities, and keep accurate records. The earliest birth, baptismal, marriage, and death records in most Italian parishes date from the beginning of the 17th century, for it took that long to implement the new rules. Important changes occurred also among the monastic orders. The Capuchins, founded in 1536 and named after the shape of their hood (cappuccio), were an offshoot of the Franciscan order that drew ordinary people into the life of the church. Religious reforms could not change the political realities of the Italian peninsula. Under the control of powerful rulers, the PAPACY was no longer politically independent. Its political fate was controlled by the Spanish monarchy, which was the dominant power in Italy and the Continent. The Catholic Reformation affected Spain and the Italian states most directly. Protestant minorities in these countries were silenced and their leaders forced into exile, the clergy tightened its hold on education, and the expression

192 Cattaneo, Carlo

of ideas was monitored carefully for signs of heresy. The arts were mobilized to glorify the church. Places of worship were redesigned and embellished to encourage attendance and participation in religious rituals. While Protestants shunned artistic displays, Catholics reveled in the glories of BAROQUE art. With the reorganization of the church, affirmation of traditional Catholic doctrines, founding of new schools, and adoption of new rituals and art forms, the Catholic Reformation had an enormous and controversial impact on Italian culture. Critics deplore the stifling effects of enforced religious conformity in Catholic countries like Italy and Spain, forgetting perhaps that Protestant countries were equally repressive. GIORDANO BRUNO, TOMMASO CAMPANELLA, and GALILEO were the most prominent victims of this repressive climate. Critics also charge that the Catholic Reformation isolated Italy from the most progressive parts of Europe where the economic and political institutions of the modern world were being developed. Many Italians who shared these perceptions opposed the church and rallied to the cause of ANTICLERICALISM.

Cattaneo, Carlo (1801–1869) economist, historian, government critic, and reformer Cattaneo was born in Milan to a family of modest means, studied jurisprudence, and graduated from the University of Pavia in 1824. Drawn to the study of social problems and statistical investigations, he contributed to DOMENICO ROMAGNOSI’s Annali universali di statistica (1833–38), and in 1839 founded his own review, Il Politecnico, which called for economic and political reforms. Averse to political conspiracy, Cattaneo initially hoped to promote reforms within the framework of the AUSTRIAN EMPIRE, to which his native region of Lombardy belonged and which he hoped could be transformed into a federation of equal nationalities. Italian independence would be a gradual consequence of such a federal system. Disillusioned by the lack of interest in reform shown by the Austrian authorities, Cat-

taneo supported the REVOLUTION of 1848 and served as head of the revolutionary war council that took charge of Milan during the revolution. His republican sentiments became manifest when he opposed the plan to unite Lombardy to the kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia, commenting that he preferred rule by an enlightened Austria to rule by a backward Piedmont. Although a republican, Cattaneo also opposed GIUSEPPE MAZZINI’s view of Italy as a centralized republic, arguing that a loose federation was preferable, given Italy’s regional diversity. Forced into exile by the failure of the revolution, Cattaneo settled in Switzerland, where he remained until 1859. He was disappointed that the liberation of the South in 1860, which he supported, resulted in a centralized monarchy. He refused to take a seat in the Italian parliament, to which he was elected in 1860 and 1867, so as not to take the oath of loyalty to the king that was required of all elected members. He lived out his last years in Lugano, Switzerland. Cattaneo’s intellectual influence was felt across political divides. He introduced POSITIVISM to Italy, promoted the study of statistics and social problems, and inspired scholars and political activists critical of the monarchy. His essay on the key role of cities in Italian history (1858) established the field of urban studies.

Cavallero, Ugo (1880–1943) military and industrial expert, general and army chief of staff Highly regarded for his professional competence, this commander played a major role in the preparation and conduct of military operations in WORLD WAR II. Born into a prominent Piedmontese family, Cavallero received his first commission as a lieutenant in 1910. In 1911 he ranked first in his class at the war college and volunteered for duty in the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR. Promoted to the rank of captain and awarded a bronze medal for military valor, in May 1915 he was appointed to the general staff of General LUIGI CADORNA. Cavallero’s skills as a military planner were instrumental in halting the Aus-

Cavallotti, Felice 193

tro-German offensive after the BATTLE OF and in reorganizing the army for the final battles of the war. In 1918 he was promoted to brigadier general and later served as Italian military representative at the PARIS PEACE CONFERENCE. In 1920 he resigned from the army to work for private industry. BENITO MUSSOLINI sought his advice and appointed him undersecretary of war in 1925. Cavallero was apparently instrumental in having General PIETRO BADOGLIO appointed chief of staff, but disagreements with his chief led Cavallero to resign as undersecretary in 1928. Back in civilian life, Cavallero took on the presidency of the ANSALDO STEEL WORKS and reorganized the firm during his tenure (1928–33). Called back into service, in 1937 he succeeded RODOLFO GRAZIANI as commander of Italian forces in East Africa. After the conclusion of the Pact of Steel between Italy and Germany, he assumed responsibility for coordinating military preparations of the two countries and became identified with the Fascist regime’s proGerman policies. In December 1940 Cavallero replaced Badoglio as chief of staff after the armed forces had suffered serious military reverses in Africa and Albania. His willingness to let the German high command assume principal responsibility for the conduct of the war on all fronts put him on a collision course with fellow officers critical of Germany, and also with Mussolini’s initial resolve to fight a “parallel war” without German help. As chief of staff, Cavallero did not press to reduce the size of the armed forces and improve their armament, yielding instead to Mussolini’s desire to maintain a numerically large army. Mussolini dismissed him in February 1943 as part of a general reshuffling of top positions. Badoglio had him arrested after Mussolini’s ouster from power on July 25, 1943. While in prison, Cavallero wrote an exculpatory memorandum, which magnified his differences with Mussolini and his role in the events leading up to the dictator’s ouster. Badoglio may have deliberately allowed a copy of Cavallero’s memorandum to fall into German hands to compromise him. Cavallero apparently committed suicide on September 13, 1943, under circumstances that have CAPORETTO

never been fully clarified, perhaps to avoid being forced to cooperate with the Germans after the Italian army surrendered to the Allies on September 3, 1943.

Cavalli, Francesco See OPERA. Cavallotti, Felice (1842–1898) charismatic political agitator, journalist, and Radical Party leader Cavallotti caught the public imagination as an opponent of the monarchy and of parliamentary corruption. Born in Milan, he interrupted his studies to fight as a volunteer for GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI in 1860 and 1866. That same year he graduated from the University of Padua with a law degree, but chose to pursue a career as a journalist, political commentator, poet, and playwright. Elected to parliament in 1873, he joined the LIBERAL LEFT, where he distinguished himself for his stand against the practices of political TRANSFORMISM. When the Liberals came to power in 1876, he moved further to the left, calling for universal suffrage and for a “social republic” that would close the gap between rich and poor, government and the people. Cavallotti rejected the idea of insurrection and looked to parliament to carry on the struggle on behalf of the people. The so-called Pact of Rome that he drew up for the movements of the Left called for the protection of civil rights, administrative decentralization, free elementary education, reduced military spending, and restraints on the power of the king. As leader of the first Radical Party, Cavallotti led the opposition to the government of FRANCESCO CRISPI, whom he called corrupt and a threat to democracy. His vehement denunciations of political practices and opponents aroused both admiration and hatred. He died from a fatal wound suffered while fighting his 33rd political duel. The Radical Party embarked on a more moderate course after his death, which came just as the political system that he condemned experienced a crisis from which the parties of the Left emerged stronger.

194 Cavazzoni, Sefano

Cavazzoni, Sefano See PPI. Caviglia, Enrico (1862–1945) army general who played a major role in World War I Caviglia served as a lieutenant in Ethiopia in 1896 and in Japan as a military observer during the Russo-Japanese War. He distinguished himself as a field commander in WORLD WAR I. He was a key figure in the aftermath of the BATTLE OF CAPORETTO, when he directed the redeployment of the divisions that halted the Austrian advance. He was also largely responsible for planning the final offensives of the war. These achievements earned him the rank of army general. He served briefly as war minister in 1919 and was appointed senator the same year. He commanded the troops that evicted Gabriele D’Annunzio’s legionnaires from FIUME in December 1920. Initially a Fascist sympathizer, Caviglia turned against fascism during the MATTEOTTI crisis. He was promoted to the rank of marshal in 1926, but generally kept out of the public eye during the Fascist period, pursuing his professional military interests as a writer and international observer, and working quietly behind the scenes to undermine his rival, Marshal PIETRO BADOGLIO. Caviglia retained the king’s confidence throughout these years. He played an advisory role in the king’s ouster of BENITO MUSSOLINI in July 1943, was mentioned as a possible successor to Mussolini as head of government (the king chose Badoglio instead), commanded the short-lived defense of Rome against the Germans, and surrendered the city on September 10, 1943.

Cavour, Camillo Benso, Count of (1810–1861) chief architect of Italian unification and first Italian prime minister The first prime minister of the kingdom of Italy was born to a family of the Piedmontese nobility. He attended military school (1820–26), pur-

sued a military career, but left the army in 1831 to pursue farming and management of familyowned lands. Successful as a landlord and financially independent, he turned his attention to public affairs. He was an advocate of childhood education, agricultural association, free trade, and civil liberties. He entered politics in 1847 when new laws on freedom of the press gave him the incentive to launch Il Risorgimento, a newspaper that gave its name to the movement for national unification. He was among those liberals who in January 1848 called on King CHARLES ALBERT to grant a constitution. In June 1848 he was elected to Sardinia’s first parliament, where he supported the war against Austria and the annexation of LOMBARDY and VENETIA. Reelected in 1849, he led the political center against supporters of absolute monarchy and the clericals on the Right, and democrats and republicans on the Left. Cavour’s political and economic principles were firmly fixed. He opposed the clerical right and democratic left, was for constitutional monarchy, limited voting rights, parliamentary government, freedom of the press, and free trade. In 1850–52 Cavour held cabinet posts as minister of agriculture and commerce and minister of finance. He became prime minister in November 1852, and held that post with only one brief interruption until his death. As prime minister he took firm control of parliament and directed both domestic and foreign policy. He presided over an ambitious and successful program of railroad construction, naval expansion, and industrialization that gave Piedmont the economic lead among the Italian states. His dislike of Austria, support of political dissidents and exiles from other Italian states, and reliance on parliament made him popular among liberals in Italy and abroad. Austrian opposition prompted Cavour to look for allies among those liberals. In Italy he relied on the support of liberals who wanted national independence, abroad he looked for governments that shared his liberal principles and were prepared to challenge Austrian hegemony in Italy. Cavour admired the

Cellini, Benvenuto 195

British system of government, but could not get British support because the government would not abandon its policy of neutrality. NAPOLEON III, on the other hand, was prepared to align France with Piedmont-Sardinia against Austria. Cavour’s decision to go to war alongside England and France against Russia in the CRIMEAN WAR opened up new diplomatic prospects. One result was the secret AGREEMENT OF PLOMBIÈRES, concluded in July 1858 by Cavour and the French emperor. By its terms, France agreed to come to Piedmont’s aid in a war against Austria in return for territorial and other compensations from Piedmont. The agreement went into effect when Cavour provoked Austria into declaring war on Piedmont-Sardinia in April 1859. But the Second WAR OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE did not go quite as Cavour had hoped. France pulled out before Austria was decisively defeated, and a chagrined Cavour stepped down as prime minister in July 1859. He returned to office in January 1860 to preside over the unexpected annexation of central Italy, the spectacular success of GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI’s expedition to Sicily and Naples, and the incorporation of the South into the newly formed Kingdom of Italy. None of this was part of a predetermined plan. Individual initiatives, fortuitous circumstances, and chance played a large role in these events. Nevertheless, Cavour showed his political skill in being able to turn unexpected developments to Piedmont’s advantage. It is not that he was a mere opportunist, as some of his critics have charged, for he was a convinced liberal and an Italian patriot in his own way. He simply did not envisage such a rapid conclusion to the process of national unification, which he would have preferred to see happen in a more gradual manner. He did not approve of Garibaldi’s expedition to Sicily, tried to stop it, and when he realized that he could not do so, went along with it to prevent the more impetuous and politically suspect republican patriots from controlling it, gaining the upper hand, and turning the South into a center of republican agitation. It was to advance his vision of moderate, constitutional

government that he and King VICTOR EMMANUEL II decided to send the Piedmontese army to the South, with the consent of France. To get there, they invaded, occupied and never relinquished a large slice of papal territory, which also became part of the Kingdom of Italy. Cavour would have preferred a more orderly process, but was ready nevertheless to seize the opportunities that came his way. He decided to extend Piedmontese law to the annexed territories and ratify the process by means of well-orchestrated popular plebiscites that returned large majorities in favor of national unification under the monarchy of Victor Emmanuel II. His constitutional but high-handed procedures left bitter political legacies. Southern resentment found expression in BRIGANDAGE; democrats and republicans, including Garibaldi, protested vehemently against the cession to France of the province of NICE and the REGION OF SAVOY, which was part of Cavour’s bargain with Napoleon; the PAPACY denounced the loss of its territory and refused to recognize the new state. Thus was born the conflict of CHURCH AND STATE that bedeviled Italian politics until it was settled in 1929. Many issues were unresolved when Cavour died unexpectedly on June 6, 1861, but the unification of Italy under the HOUSE OF SAVOY was unquestionably his great achievement and his most important legacy.

Cellini, Benvenuto (1500–1572) Renaissance artist and autobiographer The candid self-portrait that this Florentine goldsmith and sculptor gave of himself in his Autobiography makes him seem remarkably modern. It is the story of an ambitious, assertive, and resourceful individual, who prevails by his talent and quick wit, and is not shy about broadcasting his merits. His family background was ordinary, but not without surprises. The father, a mason, wanted his son to take up the same trade, but allowed him to take up the arts when he saw the young man’s passion and talent for drawing. Cellini latched onto powerful patrons.

196 Cena, Giovanni

eration that they had brought the visual arts to perfection. The Autobiography is a carefully constructed self-portrait that mixes personal pride with candid assessments of strengths and weaknesses. It parades its subject as brave, quarrelsome, boastful, generous, candid, deceitful, devoted to art, and totally self-absorbed. As the portrait of a genuine human being it reflects the interest in the individual that was the notable novelty of the culture of Renaissance HUMANISM.

Cena, Giovanni See FACCIO, RINA. Cesi, Federico (1585–1630)

Benvenuto Cellini (Library of Congress)

From 1519 to 1540 he worked mostly at the papal court in Rome, and from 1519 to 1540 at the French court in Paris. After 1540 he worked mostly for the MEDICI FAMILY in Florence. Most of his Roman works were lost when he melted them to provide precious metal for the pope just before the SACK OF ROME. The saltcellar that he cast for Francis I displays his goldsmith’s talent for meticulously conceived and executed miniature detail. The most important work of his Florentine period is the statue of Perseus beheading Medusa. This and his few other surviving works suggest an artist more preoccupied with realistic representation than with conveying emotion. Cellini’s intense pride in his artistic skill is a recurring theme of his Autobiography. It reflects not only his sense of personal achievement but also the sentiment shared by artists of his gen-

natural scientist and cultural innovator, Prince of Sant’Angelo and San Polo Born to a family of the Roman nobility, Prince Federico received the best education available in his day. His mastery of classical Latin placed him at the forefront of humanist scholarship, but his most impressive intellectual attribute was a lively curiosity and an encyclopedic mind that reached out to all branches of knowledge. At age 18 he helped found the Roman Accademia dei Lincei in 1603 (see ACADEMIES), an interdisciplinary group that cultivated the study of the natural sciences and mathematics. Cesi visited Naples to familiarize himself with the scientific studies of Giambattista Della Porta and his school of southern philosophy. After 1613, Cesi became a convert to the school of GALILEO, adopting the mathematical and experimental methods associated with the Florentine scientist. Cesi’s adoption of Galilean methodology is thought to have oriented Italian science away from the study of magic and the supernatural and in the direction of exact measurement and experimental verification. Cesi exercised great influence on his contemporaries because of his personal prestige, social connections, and indefatigable work as a publicist. He was responsible for the publication of important scientific works, illustrations of flora and fauna specimens, collection of natural objects, use of precision instruments, and the

CGIL 197

staging of scientific demonstrations for the public. While not himself a practicing scientist, Cesi was instrumental in propagating scientific knowledge and interest in experimentation among educated Italians, thus helping to keep scientific culture alive at a time when it was suspect in the eyes of religious and political authorities in the peninsula.

CGIL (Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro) As the major union of workers in Italy, the CGIL directs and coordinates the activities of its member federations in the various sectors of the economy. Worker representatives from the major political parties, the Christian Democrats (DC), Communists (PCI), and Socialists (PSI) founded it in wartime Rome in June 1944. The union called for a national plan of reconstruction, new labor contracts, full employment, land reform, and comprehensive social assistance for all workers. Irreconcilable political and organizational differences with communists caused ACLI (Associazione Cristiana dei Lavoratori Italiani), the labor organization of the Christian Democrats, to leave the CGIL in September 1948 and to found the rival, DC-dominated CISL (Confederazione Italiana dei Sindacati dei Lavoratori) in 1950. The CGIL remained dominant in large industry and among agricultural laborers and sharecroppers in the areas of northern and central Italy that voted for the PCI. From 1949 to 1952 it campaigned unsuccessfully for a national labor plan based on the nationalization of the electrical industry, land reclamation, construction of public housing, schools, and hospitals. Although formally independent, it flexed its organizational muscle for political purposes related to the objectives of the PCI. In July 1948 it called a national strike in the wake of the failed attempt on the life of communist leader PALMIRO TOGLIATTI. It did the same in July 1960 to bring down the center-right government headed by FERNANDO TAMBRONI. Opposing parties and employer groups concluded that the CGIL’s

objectives were more political than economic, and stiffened in their resolve to defeat its proposals. The 1950s saw organized labor fighting a defensive battle against employers who were emboldened by the spectacular recovery of the ECONOMIC MIRACLE. In 1955 the CGIL abandoned the tactic of negotiating contracts centrally on a national basis, and allowed its trade federations and local sections to bargain autonomously. It adopted a more militant stance in the 1960s when it encouraged frequent recourse to strikes and organized political protests. By the late 1960s the CGIL was noticeably more militant than the PCI, intransigent in labor negotiations, and sympathetic to the street actions of left-wing activists. In the protests of the “hot autumn” of 1969 unions belonging to the CGIL and CISL made common cause with each other and with the workers and students who took to the streets. Over the next few years, unions stepped up their recruiting and obtained major concessions from employers on wages, benefits, and direct worker involvement in labor negotiations through local factory councils. Wage increases automatically pegged to the rate of inflation (scala mobile) became a standard feature of labor contracts. Governments were pressured into increasing pension, housing, and education benefits. In July 1972 the three major unions, CGIL, CISL, and the socialist UIL (Unione Italiana del Lavoro) signed a pact of cooperation that was supposed to blossom into a full merger. Euphoric labor leaders envisaged the possibility of making the labor movement a vehicle for political and social reform, but the anticipated unity of the labor movement foundered on political differences among the unions and their respective political patrons. The CGIL was by far the most militant of the three major confederations through most of the 1970s. Economic crisis and the PCI strategy of pursuing the HISTORIC COMPROMISE with the dominant DC put an end to CGIL militancy in the late 1970s. The decline of labor militancy that began in the 1980s continues to this day,

198 Charles V

due to many causes. The CGIL found itself at the losing end of many confrontations throughout the 1980s and 1990s. In 1985 a public referendum abolished the scala mobile. Reductions in government spending, a global economy that enables employers to move resources to places friendly to business, the influx of nonunionized workers from developing countries, and declining membership continue to sap the power of labor unions and cut into social benefits. The prosperity of the 1990s benefited large strata of the population, workers entered the ranks of the middle classes, and middle-class individualism supplanted working-class collectivism as the dominant ethic. The CGIL is still an important presence on the labor scene, but can no longer aspire to the role of national reformer that it envisaged for itself in the heyday of its power in the 1970s.

Charles V (1500–1558) king of Spain (1516–1556) and Holy Roman Emperor (1519–1558) Charles V enters Italian history, as he does the history of many other places in the world, by royal inheritance. From his grandfather Ferdinand II of Aragon, he inherited Naples, Sicily, and Sardinia. Possession of these territories involved Charles in a dynastic conflict with Francis I of France for control of the Italian peninsula. But as the self-proclaimed defender of Catholicism against the spread of Protestantism, he also had an interest in the viability of the PAPACY and its possessions. Consequently, Italy played a large role in his designs, although his main efforts would always be directed against Protestant inroads in Germany and the Netherlands, and against the Ottoman Turks who threatened Christian Europe from the east. Charles’s Italian policy was inspired and implemented by his principal adviser, the Italian-born Mercurino Arborio, marquis of Gattinara (1465– 1530). It was Gattinara who prevailed upon Charles to fight the French for control of Milan, thus involving the emperor in the quagmire of

Italian politics. When France, Milan, Venice, Florence, and Rome formed the alliance known as the League of Cognac (1526), Charles responded by sending an army into Italy. It consisted largely of Lutherans from the empire’s German provinces, and they gleefully carried out the SACK OF ROME (1527), which shocked the Catholic world. Pope CLEMENT VII accepted a costly peace settlement and agreed to crown Charles as Holy Roman Emperor (1530). Charles’s control of Italy was still far from secure as Francis allied himself with the Ottoman Turks to recover his position in the peninsula. French influence would be eliminated with the TREATY OF CATEAU-CAMBRÉSIS, while the Turkish threat to Italy persisted long after the death of the emperor in 1558. Although Charles treated Italy as a base of operations against the Turks and taxed his Italian subjects to finance his wars, the costs of his Italian campaigns probably exceeded the revenues he raised in the peninsula. He spent his last years in solitary retirement in Castile after abdicating as king of Spain in 1556, and died knowing that he had failed to restore the religious unity of Christian Europe and to fend off the Turkish threat. He came closest to succeeding in Italy, which became part of the Habsburg Empire of his descendants, thanks to his persistent challenge of French dominance.

Charles VI See AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION, WAR OF THE; MARIA THERESA.

Charles Albert (1798–1849) king of Sardinia (1831–1849) Charles Albert had an unconventional upbringing for a ruler of his time. His father Charles Emmanuel, who belonged to a lateral branch of the HOUSE OF SAVOY, sympathized with the FRENCH REVOLUTION and served in the army of NAPOLEON I. Charles Albert was educated in France and Switzerland, received the title of count from Napoleon and also served in the French army. Returning to Piedmont after

Charles Felix 199

Napoleon’s downfall, he was suspected of harboring liberal tendencies. Since neither his uncle King VICTOR EMMANUEL I nor the king’s brother CHARLES FELIX (1765–1831) had any male heirs, Charles Albert was in line to inherit the throne. On friendly terms with liberal members of the Piedmontese nobility, he was drawn into the conspiracy that resulted in the failed REVOLUTION of 1821 during which, acting as regent in the temporary absence of the king, he acceded to liberal demands for a constitution. Victor Emmanuel I resigned and Charles Felix, who succeeded him, quickly disavowed the constitution. Charles Albert, now in disgrace with the new king, went into temporary exile in Florence. He was rehabilitated in 1823 when he led troops fighting against the liberals in Spain. Charles Albert inherited the Sardinian throne at the death of Charles Felix. He ruled as an absolute monarch, persecuted and put down political conspiracies and subversive organizations, including Mazzini’s YOUNG ITALY, and sought the support of conservative governments. But when fear of revolution receded in the late 1830s, Charles Albert enacted administrative and economic reforms. He adopted a uniform code of laws for the entire kingdom, comprising PIEDMONT, SAVOY, and SARDINIA, created a council of state to advise him on government, abolished feudal obligations in the island of Sardinia and internal tolls throughout the state, negotiated commercial treaties with Great Britain and France, encouraged maritime trade, and the expansion of the port of Genoa. Unwilling to sacrifice any of his royal prerogatives, he nevertheless made cautious overtures to liberal elements, hinting privately that he favored the cause of Italian independence. The chance to fight for Italian independence presented itself in 1848 when revolution broke out in Austrian-ruled Lombardy. Charles Albert granted the Statuto, which later became the first Italian CONSTITUTION, declared war on Austria, and fought the first of the WARS OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE. After his defeat at the battle of Novara in March 1849, he abdicated in favor of

his son VICTOR EMMANUEL II and went into exile in Portugal, where he died in July 1849. An enigmatic and controversial figure, Charles Albert was dubbed Re tentenna (King Waffle) for his changes of political direction and apparent vacillating between repression and reform. His pursuit of self-serving dynastic interests went hand in hand with selfless patriotism and a willingness to take risks for the cause of Italian independence. The debate goes on. Perhaps he can be seen as an absolute monarch who wanted to preserve the full powers of the crown while pursuing policies that encouraged liberals, whose political objectives he did not share. The liberal cause of Italian independence was not incompatible with the expansionist policies that the House of Savoy had pursued for nearly three centuries. His youthful brush with the French Revolution and Napoleon had left in him a craving for controlled change and for personal glory that he tried unsuccessfully to combine with the principle of absolute monarchy.

Charles Emmanuel II of Savoy See WALDENSIANS.

Charles Emmanuel IV See SAVOY, HOUSE OF. Charles Felix (1765–1831) king of Sardinia (1821–1831) Charles Felix (Carlo Felice), became king of Piedmont-Sardinia in 1821 following the abdication of his older brother VICTOR EMMANUEL I. His immediate concern was to repress the insurgents who had pressured his nephew CHARLES ALBERT, who had taken over as regent in his uncle’s absence, into granting a constitution. Charles Felix called on the Austrian army to put down the insurgents and exiled his nephew to Florence. Charles Felix was determined to prevent the recurrence of revolution, oppose political liberalism in all its forms, and assert his authority as an absolute monarch. His purge of

200 Charles of Bourbon

officers suspected of harboring liberal sentiments undermined the efficiency of the army, which he valued as the ultimate guardian of order and stability. Fearful that secular schooling was ultimately responsible for the loss of faith in traditional values and institutions, Charles Felix favored clerical control of education at all levels and encouraged the JESUITS to assume control of universities. His policies drove political dissenters into exile in Spain, France, and England, from where they carried on their struggle against absolute monarchy and the provisions of the CONGRESS OF VIENNA. Charles Felix showed a more progressive side of his character in matters of public administration and economic policy. While he expanded police powers to crack down on political dissenters, he also insisted on following correct judicial procedures against political suspects. GIUSEPPE MAZZINI may have been a beneficiary of Charles Felix’s insistence on correct judicial proceedings. Charles Felix encouraged the growth of Genoese shipping, ordered expeditions against Muslim strongholds that imperiled travel and commerce in the Mediterranean, and succeeded in reconciling most Genoese to the loss of political independence and acceptance of Piedmontese rule. He died childless, the last direct descendant of the main branch of the House of Savoy, and was succeeded by Charles Albert, the first monarch of the Savoia-Carignano branch that ruled Italy until 1946.

Charles of Bourbon (1716–1788) king of Naples and Sicily (1735–1759) Son of Philip V, king of Spain, grandson of Louis XIV of France, and designated heir to the Grand Duchy of Tuscany upon the expected extinction of the Medici dynasty, Charles chose instead to claim the crowns of Naples and Sicily, which had been occupied by Austria in 1707 during the WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION. In 1734 Charles (also known as Don Carlos) led a Spanish army into southern Italy, defeated the Austrians who were embroiled in the War of the Polish Succession, and assumed the crowns of Naples and

Sicily. He was crowned in 1735 and ruled until 1759, when he succeeded to the Spanish throne as Charles III. As King Charles of Naples and Sicily, without any numeration to his name, he regained political independence for the kingdom after more than 230 years of foreign domination, won international recognition for the state, and founded the Neapolitan BOURBON dynasty that ruled in Naples and Sicily until 1860. Charles devoted his energies to building up the power of the monarchy, curtailing feudal and clerical privileges, creating an army, reforming the complex legal system, founding schools, initiating a land census, encouraging agriculture and commerce, and building the impressive royal palace and gardens of Caserta. He appointed able counselors, most notably BERNARDO TANUCCI, who served as chief adviser in domestic and foreign affairs. Charles was succeeded by his third-born son as FERDINAND IV, a minor who governed under the tutelage of advisers. Ferdinand’s ministers carried out the reforms envisaged by his father, until fear of revolution and the influence of conservative advisers put an end to the reforms in the 1780s. Charles is remembered as Naples’ most progressive monarch who made the Bourbon dynasty popular and brought his kingdom into the mainstream of the ENLIGHTENMENT.

Cherubini, Maria Luigi (1760–1842) opera composer, active mostly abroad and most influential in France Cherubini was born in Florence, where he studied music under his father and other local musicians. Evidence of his talent for musical composition persuaded his father to send him to BOLOGNA and the Tuscan grand duke to finance his education there under the renowned composer Giuseppe Sarti (1729–1802). After producing several comic and serious operas in Italy and London, Cherubini took up residence in Paris in 1788. During the turbulent years of the French Revolution he composed choral numbers and hymns for public festivals staged by the government to stimulate patriotic support for the

church and state 201

Revolution. Médée (1797), based on the Greek myth of Medea, is considered to be his masterpiece, but in his time Cherubini’s artistic reputation rested on a great many other compositions for the stage, sacred music, and various orchestral pieces. The stage drama Les deux journées (The two days, 1800) was considered his finest piece at the time. It catered to the taste generated by the French Revolution for strong action and dramatic situations and was performed to acclaim in France and Germany. Beethoven heard it in Vienna and expressed great esteem for its composer. Cherubini’s stay in France was not without problems, some personal and some professional. An unhappy marriage and, most of all, Napoleon’s dislike for Cherubini’s operas, which he found heavy, slow-moving, and uninspiring, complicated his life and brought about a temporary withdrawal from musical composition. Cherubini’s influence was felt mainly in French opera, where he bridges the gap between CLASSICISM and ROMANTICISM. He was less influential in Italy, where Medée was not performed until 1909 in translation as Medea, and was revived in the 1950s, again in its Italian version, by the soprano Maria Callas. He belongs to the group of 18th- and early 19th-century composers, which included his younger contemporary GASPARO SPONTINI, who sought primary recognition outside Italy and addressed European audiences.

Christian Democracy See DC. church and state In the 19th century, the process of Italian national unification brought to a head tensions between church and state that were already evident in the 18th century. The appointment of bishops, the legal status of the clergy, tax exemptions for religious orders and communities, accumulation of property in the hands of religious groups, and the role of the JESUIT ORDER were issues of contention between church and state that predated the movement for national unifi-

cation. The claims of modern governments to full authority over their people and territory clashed with the traditional powers that the church regarded as necessary conditions for the fulfillment of its spiritual mission. Political liberals and religious reformers attempted in vain to reconcile or mediate the conflict. The NEOGUELFS thought that the PAPACY could lead the movement for national independence. They were encouraged by the election of Pope PIUS IX in 1846, until the papal response to the REVOLUTION of 1848 made it clear that the papacy would not put in jeopardy its relations with Catholic powers by supporting a nationalist movement. The papacy’s conviction that it could not carry out its spiritual duties without territorial sovereignty put the church on a collision course with the Italian national movement. While papal policy insisted on retention of political sovereignty over papal territory, Italian patriots looked upon papal territory as an integral part of the nation and on ROME as the natural capital of the unified state. The seizure of papal territory by the Piedmontese army in 1860 and 1870 gave rise to the ROMAN QUESTION. The formula of a “free church in a free state” proposed by Cavour shortly before his death proved unacceptable to Pius IX, who called himself a “prisoner in the Vatican” and refused to recognize the Italian state. The state expropriated church properties, shut down churches, religious communities, and charities, and engaged in anticlerical polemics. The papacy responded by calling on Catholics to boycott the state. The papal policy of non expedit adopted in the 1870s warned Catholics that it was “not expedient” for them to participate in the political life of the nation, and advised them not to vote or run for office in national elections. New religious associations, missionary drives, and mass rituals sought to rally the faithful behind their religious leaders. The state also reached out to the masses, encouraging secular education and fostering ANTICLERICALISM. Only in the first decade of the 20th century did the clashes and diatribes between clericals and anticlericals abate. Alarmed by the rise of

202 Cialdini, Enrico

socialist movements, the governing liberals let up on their anticlericalism and the papacy relaxed the non-expedit to allow Catholics to vote in support of designated candidates. The conflict between church and state ended officially with the signing of the Concordat and the Lateran Pacts in 1929. There was still the potential for conflict between the Fascist regime that sponsored the accords and the church in the sensitive areas of family legislation, education, youth organization, and racial legislation. The fall of fascism and the rise of Christian Democracy after 1945 opened up a new chapter in the history of church-state relations in Italy. Christian Democrats relied on the church to rally voters and help them win their political battles, and the church relied on the governing Christian Democratic Party (DC) to ward off the threat of communism and help it propagate Christian values. But while relations between church and state were cordial in the years of DC hegemony, the same cannot be said for relations between the religious hierarchy and society in general. The church and the DC suffered serious defeat on the issues of legalized ABORTION, contraception, and DIVORCE. The question of church and state became more and more the question of church and society. In February 1984 church and state negotiated a new concordat that revised the provisions of 1929 on several key issues. Catholicism was no longer defined as the official religion of the state, compulsory religious instruction in public schools was abolished, church property was made fully taxable, Vatican financial deals had to conform to Italian law, state salaries for priests were replaced by voluntary contributions through the income tax system. The dire consequences for the church predicted by opponents of the revisions did not materialize. Public opinion polls show that 75–80 percent of Italians consider themselves religious, marry in church, and raise their children to be observant. The election of a non-Italian pope, JOHN PAUL II, in 1978 may have contributed to the easing of tensions between church and state. Under this pope the papacy has distanced itself from Italian politics. The pope’s official visit to the Italian par-

liament in the year 2003 was a clear sign of easing tensions.

Cialdini, Enrico (1811–1892) military and political figure Cialdini rose to commander in chief of the Italian army after a long apprenticeship that began with his participation in the REVOLUTION of 1831 in his native city of Modena. A political exile in the 1830s and 1840s, he fought on the liberal side in Portugal and Spain, returning to Italy in 1848 to fight against Austria in the papal army. In 1849 he joined the Piedmontese army, fought in the CRIMEAN WAR, and commanded a division in the Second WAR OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE (1859). In 1860 he led the Piedmontese troops that defeated the papal army at the battle of Castelfidardo, giving the Piedmontese control of the regions of Marches and Umbria. In November of 1860 he took charge and won the surrender of the last Neapolitan troops holding out in Gaeta and Messina. Those successes gained him the title of duke of Gaeta. As commander of troops in the recently occupied South he took the first measures against BRIGANDAGE (1861) but was quickly replaced by his archrival, General ALFONSO LA MARMORA. In the Third War of National Independence he shared command of field operations with La Marmora. That unwise arrangement contributed to the Italian defeat at the Battle of Custoza because the two commanders did not agree on tactics. He took over as sole army commander following La Marmora’s dismissal after the battle. The two generals and their respective backers engaged in bitter polemics after the war. Cialdini served in the chamber of deputies (1861–64), was appointed to the senate (1864), and as ambassador to Madrid (1870) and Paris (1876). He retired from public life in 1882.

Ciampi, Carlo Azeglio (1920–

)

economist, banker, prime minister and president of the republic Ciampi was born in Livorno to a family of opticians, served in the army during WORLD WAR II in

Ciano, Galeazzo 203

Kosovo, supported the short-lived ACTION PARTY after the war, then distanced himself from other political parties. Untainted by political scandal, he maintained a reputation for professional competence and impartiality. An observant Catholic, he does not make public display of his religion. His long tenure as governor of the BANK OF ITALY (1979–93) confirmed his reputation for honesty and administrative effectiveness. He defended the CURRENCY successfully at a time of monetary crisis, launched long overdue reforms of the banking system, and freed the Bank of Italy from political interference and the supervision of the Ministry of the Treasury. In April 1993 President OSCAR LUIGI SCALFARO appointed him prime minister, the first nonparliamentarian to hold that top government post. He picked his ministers for their competence and reliability, without reference to their politics, forming a broadly based government to deal with the most urgent problems of the moment. Ciampi achieved spending cuts, economic privatization, monetary stability, and political reforms during his eight months in office. He resigned in January 1994, after parliament had approved his austerity budget, to force new general elections that he felt were necessary to help the country deal with the spreading political scandal of TANGENTOPOLI. Appointed treasury minister in 1996, he prepared the country for admission to the European monetary system. His broad popularity with the public and the political establishment brought about his election to the highest office in the land, the presidency of the republic, in May 1999. His term of office will expire in 2005.

Ciano, Costanzo (1876–1939) military and political figure Born in Livorno, Ciano graduated from the city’s naval academy in 1896, saw action in the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR (1911–12), and distinguished himself in WORLD WAR I commanding torpedo boats in small-scale surprise actions known as beffe (jests), which won public acclaim. Repeatedly decorated, he was later promoted to the rank of admiral and received the title of count of

Cortellazzo, named after one of his exploits. He was an early Fascist who participated in the March on Rome and held important ministerial posts, including the ministry of communications (1924–34). As minister of communications he carried out the reforms that enabled BENITO MUSSOLINI to boast that trains finally ran on time. He was also president of the chamber of fasces and corporations (1934–39). In 1926 Mussolini secretly designated him as his successor in case of his own death. Political boss of Livorno, Ciano’s influence was felt throughout Tuscany. His extensive properties included a grandiose villa in the town of Borgo a Mozzano, near Lucca. His holdings included the Livorno newspaper Il Telegrafo. Rumors of illicit wealth accumulations dogged him and his son GALEAZZO CIANO, contributing to the unpopularity of the Fascist regime in its final phase. A nationalist, an admirer of Mussolini, politically conservative but given to radical solutions, Costanzo Ciano was one of the most typical figures of the Fascist regime.

Ciano, Galeazzo (1903–1944) Fascist diplomat and foreign minister The only son of COSTANZO CIANO, his rapid rise was paved by his father’s wealth and connections. The young Ciano’s image as a privileged and spoiled child of the regime contributed to his reputation as a political lightweight playing out of his league. He was actually a quick learner and a successful student who received a law degree from the University of Rome in 1925, looked forward to a literary career, and liked to rub shoulders with artists and intellectuals. A taste for life in fashionable circles and an irresistible attraction to women competed with, and often won out over, his more serious interests. He chose to pursue a career in the diplomatic corps after graduation. By 1930 he had successive postings in Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, Beijing and the Holy See. In that same year he married Edda Mussolini (1910–95), the Duce’s daughter. The newlyweds sailed for China, where Ciano served as consul-general in Shanghai before returning to

204 cicisbeism

Beijing as plenipotentiary minister (1930–33). Back in Italy, he served as undersecretary for press and propaganda (1934–35) and as minister of the same when that bureau became a ministry (1935). That same year he volunteered for military duty in the ETHIOPIAN WAR, serving as a bomber pilot. His previous diplomatic experience, military record, and marriage opened Ciano’s way to the foreign ministry, which he took over in June 1936. His pro-German sentiments were known at the time, and the appointment was interpreted correctly as signaling BENITO MUSSOLINI’s desire for closer relations with Nazi Germany. Ciano favored alliance with Germany in his early years as foreign minister, but wavered in the face of British hostility to the ROME-BERLIN AXIS and his own personal dislike for Hitler and German foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop. By 1939 he was fearful that Germany would drag Italy into a major war for which the country was unprepared. But Ciano’s personal preferences did not count for much. Mussolini definitely had the last word in foreign policy and kept Ciano on as foreign minister because of his son-in-law’s political submissiveness and boundless admiration for him. Ciano orchestrated the Italian invasion of ALBANIA in April 1939. He later tried to keep Italy out of WORLD WAR II, but gave in as usual when the Duce decided to fight alongside Germany. He bungled the political planning for the attack on Greece in October 1940, which capped the military’s humiliating performance. Becoming increasingly suspicious toward Germany during the war and fearful of military defeat, he turned against Mussolini, but continued to work at his side, hoping that a compromise peace would allow Italy to leave the war honorably. Mussolini dismissed him as foreign minister in February 1943 and appointed him as ambassador to the Holy See. A member of the Fascist Grand Council, on the night of July 24–25 Ciano voted for the motion that called on Mussolini to resign. He was later captured by the Germans, handed over to Mussolini’s puppet regime in northern Italy, tried, and found guilty of treason for signing the

grand council’s motion. On January 11, 1944, Ciano was executed with four other Fascists who had also voted against Mussolini. His secret diary is a revealing document of Fascist diplomacy and backstairs politics.

cicisbeism Cicisbeism was a custom prevalent among the upper classes in 18th-century Italy whereby married women kept at their side young men known as cicisbei, or cavalier serventi, as devoted and solicitous companions. These young men attended to the needs of their ladies from morning till night, having access to their homes, looking after their toilettes, assisting them at mealtime, and escorting them to social gatherings. It was generally assumed for the sake of propriety that the relationship was not sexual, but suspicions to the contrary were common, especially among foreign visitors who were shocked by the ubiquitous custom. It was considered bad form for husbands to be jealous, and indeed many may have welcomed the presence of cicisbei, who relieved them of tiresome social duties. At a time when husbands were not known for being solicitous toward their wives, the custom of cicisbeism may have made marriage more bearable for many women. In Venice, marital contracts sometimes required and named a cicisbeo, who could be a relative or friend of the family. The custom was certainly more prevalent in the northern than in the southern states, where family customs were stricter and ladies had servants, but not cicisbei. It must be stressed that the status of cicisbeo was an honorable one, although not everyone was in favor of the idea. GIUSEPPE PARINI, who could be a dour moralist when it came to the failings of others, condemned the custom as frivolous or worse. Nevertheless, its prevalence suggests a tolerant disposition among the upper classes, a desire for attentive companionship, and the need for a socially acceptable pastime for young males.

Cimarosa, Domenico See OPERA.

Clement VII 205

Cisalpine Republic See NAPOLEON I. CISL See CGIL; SYNDICALISM. Civiltà Cattolica (La) This biweekly journal published by the JESUITS is an authoritative Vatican mouthpiece. Its policies are formulated and its articles written by a board of writers of proven loyalty to the PAPACY. Founded in Naples in 1850, the journal reflected a conservative viewpoint hostile to revolutionary movements, including LIBERALISM and the RISORGIMENTO. Its outlook reflected papal clashes with revolutionary movements in 1848–49, which had the effect of solidifying papal ties to the absolute monarchies of Austria and Naples. But the journal also held that absolute monarchy was incompatible with papal independence and moved its headquarters from Naples to Rome. When Italian troops seized Rome in 1870, Civiltà Cattolica moved from Rome to Florence. The journal kept up its battle against the Italian state until the Roman Question was settled in 1929. Its general philosophy was articulated forcefully by one of its early writers, Luigi Taparelli d’Azeglio (1793–1862), who rejected rational philosophy as inherently subversive, insisted on the inadequacy of reason and the flawed nature of human beings, and asserted that authority is the necessary foundation of human society. The journal’s outlook was very much in line with the conservatism of PIUS IX but was also favored by the more liberal LEO XIII.

CLN and CLNAI See RESISTANCE. Clement VII (1478–1534) pope (1523–1534) Born Giulio de’ Medici, the natural son of Giuliano de’ Medici (1453–78), and therefore nephew of LORENZO DE’ MEDICI, Giulio was made archbishop of Florence in 1513 and cardinal in

Pope Clement VII (Library of Congress)

1517 by his cousin Pope LEO X. He succeeded ADRIAN VI to the papacy in 1523 as head of the group of cardinals who supported the imperial faction. A very political pope, Clement was primarily concerned with maintaining papal independence by playing off Emperor CHARLES V against King Francis I of France, the two archrivals for power in Italy. His support of Francis angered the emperor, who unleashed his troops against Clement and brought on the SACK OF ROME in 1527. Clement was forced to acknowledge the power of Charles V by crowning him in 1530. Charles obliged him by restoring Medici rule in Florence. Dependence on the emperor did not prevent Clement from continuing to cultivate close ties with the French ruling house and arranging the marriage of Catherine de’ Medici (see MEDICI FAMILY) with Francis’s son Henry, with fateful consequences for the future

206 Clement VIII

of the French monarchy. Clement was so preoccupied with politics that he failed to appreciate the significance of Martin Luther’s challenge to papal authority and England’s separation from the Church of Rome during his pontificate. Turning a deaf ear to the emperor’s request that he summon an ecumenical council to take up the issue of religious reform, Clement lost precious time and was unable to contain the spread of Protestantism. Clement has been judged harshly by contemporaries and historians for his political and religious shortcomings.

controversy left a legacy of ANTICLERICALISM that affected figures of the ENLIGHTENMENT. Clement was more successful in his cultural and social endeavors, overseeing important projects of urban renewal, establishing public workshops, reducing unemployment, encouraging textile manufacturing, reorganizing the Roman university of the Collegio Romano, welcoming and providing financial support for artists and scholars. A man of his times, Clement believed that Catholics should be familiar with developing secular trends in order to defend the faith from its enemies.

Clement VIII See BARONIO, CESARE; TASSO, TORQUATO.

Clement XI (1649–1721) pope (1700–1721) Gian Francesco Albani, born in Urbino, who became pope as Clement XI, was caught in the ongoing dynastic struggle between Habsburgs and BOURBONS over the succession to the Spanish throne. In the ensuing WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION, Clement took the side of the Bourbons, reasoning that dominance of the peninsula by a Bourbon dynasty lodged in Spain was preferable to dominance by the more assertive Austrian Habsburgs. Victory in the war gave the Austrians control of the important states of Milan and Naples. The PAPAL STATES were not threatened, but the Habsburgs began to challenge papal claims to feudal lordship in other parts of Italy, thus beginning to chip away at the concept of papal political sovereignty. VICTOR AMADEUS II of Savoy also successfully challenged papal feudal claims to the island of Sicily recently acquired by the House of Savoy. Far more attuned to religious than to political issues, Clement agonized over JANSENISM, a Catholic reform movement suspected of heresy. When he finally issued a condemnation of the movement in the bull Unigenitus (1713), French Catholics split over the issue, threatening for a while the unity of the church. The split was healed, but the

Clement XIV (1705–1774) pope (1769–1774) Giovanni Vincenzo Ganganelli, born in the Romagna region, took on the name of Clement XIV when he was elected pope in 1769. Prior to his election he had been a popular preacher. In Rome since 1740, he was familiar with the ways of papal bureaucracy and government. The defining issue of his pontificate was the future of JESUITS, which he was under great pressure to abolish. The attacks came from intellectuals of the ENLIGHTENMENT who saw in the Jesuits the personification of obscurantist cultural traditions and stifling authority, and from monarchs who resented the independent power of the PAPACY, of which the Jesuits were a mainstay. Clement reluctantly abolished the order in 1773, thanking it for its previous services and expressing regret that it had outlived its time. The controversial decision defused tensions between the papacy and ruling monarchs, particularly the Bourbon monarchy of France, which had insisted on the suppression of the order. The dispersed Jesuits carried on a slanderous campaign against Clement, which led to rumors that they had caused his death by poisoning. His premature death put an end to educational reforms championed by JANSENISM that would have given a greater role to the secular clergy. To protect the artistic treasures of Rome, which were being despoiled and dispersed to other parts of Italy

Colleoni, Bartolomeo 207

and Europe, Clement established the Vatican Museum to gather and secure in one place paintings, sculptures, and other artistic artifacts. In the spirit of the Enlightenment, special attention was paid to gathering and preserving the pagan art of ancient Greece and Rome. Clement began the policy of state-sponsored artistic preservation that was designed to make Rome the center of Italian art and a favorite destination of tourists.

Cola di Rienzo (ca. 1313–1354) Roman reformer who sought to restore the glory of classical Rome The son of an innkeeper, Cola di Rienzo was a public notary. He rose to a position of dominant power in Rome during the absence of the papacy, with the title of tribune. He held power in May–December 1347 and August–October 1354. Presenting himself as a champion of the people against the greedy nobility, Cola found inspiration in the writings and ruins of ancient Rome, called for popular election of an emperor, extension of Roman citizenship to all Italians, and a federation of Italian cities. His ideal of a rejuvenated Italy inspired a few contemporaries, including PETRARCH, who briefly championed Cola’s cause. Cola’s message was lost on most of his contemporaries, while his bizarre behavior and demands provoked popular outrage. He was hacked to death by an angry mob while trying to escape from the city. Later generations were more appreciative. Cola’s vision of a virtuous citizenry based on the republican ideals of ancient Rome struck a chord in the ENLIGHTENMENT period. Cola the visionary attracted 19th-century romanticists and patriots. A life of Cola was found in Napoleon’s baggage after Waterloo, a novel based on Cola’s life inspired Richard Wagner to compose Rienzi, his first successful opera, and GABRIELE D’ANNUNZIO wrote a life of Cola. Cola’s extravagant expectations, drive for personal glory, and tragic death at the hands of an angry mob have also been seen as anticipations of the life and death of BENITO MUSSOLINI.

Coldiretti The Confederazione Italiana Coltivatori Diretti (Italian Confederation of Small Farmers), usually referred to as Coldiretti or Coltivatori Diretti, was founded in October 1944 by Paolo Bonomi (1910–85), who was its president until 1980. Although its charter described it as secular and apolitical, it was in fact an avowedly Catholic organization that supported the Christian Democratic Party (DC), using its political clout to help small peasant landowners and sharecroppers. Family farms are the grassroots members of Coldiretti. Above them, an intricate pattern of local councils and provincial federations culminates in a national council. The national council reserves seats for the representatives of farming women. The organization grew rapidly, reaching a membership of close to 3.6 million family farmers in 1962. It was particularly strong in the regions of the South and in mountainous areas throughout the country where small landownership prevailed. With a large delegation in parliament and control of the Ministry of Agriculture, Coldiretti was able to deliver technological services in the form of machinery and fertilizers, credit assistance, pensions and subsidies, and cooperatives to grow and sell produce. Popular support for Coldiretti was also due in no small measure to its ideology. It held up the farming family as the basic unit of society, praised the family values that went with it, and upheld private ownership as a social ideal. It packed a strong anticommunist message that appealed particularly to small landowners. The enthusiasm of small farmers for their organization was summed up in the comment of one member that he believed only in God and in Bonomi. Coldiretti’s membership has declined since the 1960s due to the crisis of small-scale farming and the rural exodus to the cities. Presently (2004), Coldiretti represents some 568,000 agricultural entrepreneurs. In its heyday, Coldiretti was a mainstay of Christian Democratic government.

Colleoni, Bartolomeo See CONDOTTIERI.

208 Colletta, Pietro

Colletta, Pietro (1775–1831) military officer and revolutionary figure This Neapolitan military officer joined the army in 1796, fought against the French in 1798, but sided with the French-sponsored PARTHENOPEAN REPUBLIC and with the monarchy of JOSEPH BONAPARTE. Drawn to these regimes by his liberal sentiments, Colletta rose to the military rank of marshal, received the title of baron, and held important administrative posts. He emerged during the Napoleonic period as the most typical representative of the liberal minority of the upper middle class and aristocracy that supported French rule. After Napoleon’s defeat in 1814–15, Colletta helped negotiate a peace settlement that included retention in rank of military officers like him who had served the previous regime. In the REVOLUTION of 1821 he sided with the insurgents, probably intending to keep in check the more radical democratic elements present in the movement. The government sent him to Sicily to suppress a separatist uprising on the island; he also served as army and navy minister (1821). Colletta was imprisoned after the absolute monarchy was restored. Liberated in 1823, he went into exile in Tuscany, where he collaborated with the liberals around GIAN PIETRO VIEUSSEUX. While living in Florence he wrote a history of Naples, the Storia del Reame di Napoli dal 1734 al 1825 (History of the kingdom of Naples, 1734–1825, 1834, English translation 1858), which reflected his dislike of both absolute monarchy and popular democracy. Colletta equated the latter with mob rule. His praise of the reforms of the Napoleonic ruler JOACHIM MURAT influenced later generations of patriots and laid the groundwork for a Muratist movement that called for national independence and representative government.

Colletti, Lucio (1924–2001) political writer and theorist This social philosopher was born in Rome and studied philosophy at the University of Messina with the Marxist philosopher Galvano Della Volpe (1895–1968). Colletti taught philosophy

at the University of Rome. He joined the Italian Communist Party (PCI) in 1949 and emerged as an important cultural party figure. His reflections on Marxism centered on the distinction between appearance and reality, a notion that Colletti derived from his understanding of Immanuel Kant. For Colletti, Marxism is an empirical method of inquiry that stays in touch with the real rather than a philosophical system with a predetermined outcome. Colletti argued that the value of labor, a concept central to Marx’s economic analysis, is determined by the social context in which labor occurs, a position that leads to questioning Marx’s axiom that labor is what creates value. Never an orthodox Marxist, Colletti broke with the PCI in 1964. His highly abstract writings were influential in the 1970s as Marxists sought ways of reconciling Marxist philosophy with the complexity of capitalism. Colletti began to drift steadily toward the right, pausing in the 1980s to identify with socialist leader BETTINO CRAXI. In the 1990s he served in parliament as a representative of the right-ofcenter FORZA ITALIA. The itinerary from left to right that Colletti followed, while not unusual among western intellectuals in the latter part of the 20th century, was highly controversial in Italy. See his From Rousseau to Lenin (1972, 1974) and Marxism and Hegel (1973, 1979).

Collodi, Carlo (1826–1890) writer famous for his children’s stories, author of Pinocchio This was the literary pseudonym, derived from the Tuscan town of Collodi where he spent his youth, adopted by Carlo Lorenzini. After fighting in the REVOLUTION of 1848, Lorenzini turned to journalism, showing in his writings a vivacious style and a sense of humor that appealed to readers. Also a talented caricaturist, he penned amusing, good-natured portrayals of the main personages and events of Florence in his day, which were later published in volume form. He was eventually attracted to writing for children. Starting with translations of fairy tales, he published two successful books of his own, Giannet-

colonialism 209

tino (1876), which was intended for school children, and Minuzzolo (1877). His fame rests almost entirely on the phenomenal success of The Adventures of Pinocchio, which first appeared in newspaper installments (1881) and then in book form (1883). This is a deceptively simple work that can be read on many different levels. The tale of the wooden puppet that gets into trouble for not resisting the temptation to play, skip classes, run away from home, and associate with undesirable companions, who is eventually redeemed by his own generous impulses, and becomes a person of flesh and blood, has stimulated endless discussion. While children enjoy the whimsical aspects of the story, adults have pondered its political, social, and psychological messages. It has been seen as patriotic, capitalist, and Freudian. It is doubtful that Lorenzini saw it as anything more than an entertaining tale that would bring him the money that he desperately needed to pay his many gambling debts and get by in life with some decorum. However one might interpret it, the richness of Lorenzini’s imagination, his felicitous style, and basic optimism have made Pinocchio one of the most widely read books. In Italy it has the status of a classic, familiar to every Italian in the original, which is much more realistic and earthy than the expurgated versions served up to American children.

colonialism Italy’s pursuit of colonial empire was controversial and divisive from the start. Advocates touted the importance of colonies for trade and settlement, critics argued that the country’s limited resources would be better spent domestically on education, promoting economic development, and reducing regional disparities. The historical memories of imperial Rome, of the maritime empires of medieval city-states, and the desire to be recognized as a modern power were powerful stimuli. However, as a latecomer to the race for colonies Italy had to confront the ambitions and rivalry of established states, which enjoyed a head start and had already staked claims to the more economically or strategically attractive territories.

Italian colonial ambitions were directed to certain African territories by the need to follow the lead of other powers and by Italy’s Mediterranean position. The country joined in the “scramble for Africa” in 1869, the year that the Suez Canal was opened, with a lease to the Bay of Assab on the Red Sea coast by the shipping company founded by RAFFAELE RUBATTINO. It was a formally private venture, launched to establish a coaling station that would facilitate Italian shipping toward the Indian Ocean. The government backed the deal and purchased the concession outright in 1882. Thus began Italy’s historic concern with the region known as the Horn of Africa. By then, France had frustrated Italian ambitions for Tunisia by declaring a protectorate over that territory (1881), reinforcing Italy’s interest in the Horn of Africa. Italian penetration of that east African region was aided indirectly by Catholic missionary efforts, particularly by the work of Cardinal Guglielmo Massaia (1809–89), whose writings describing his work among the Galla populations of Ethiopia were published in 1885–95. The explorations and writings of GIUSEPPE SAPETO also stimulated public interest in Africa. In 1889 Italy and Ethiopia concluded the TREATY OF UCCIALLI, by which the Ethiopian emperor Menelik II (1844–1913), in return for Italian military aid, acknowledged the Italian occupation of the Bay of Assab, over which Menelik claimed sovereignty. The Italian government also interpreted the treaty as giving Italy a protectorate over Ethiopia, but Menelik rejected that interpretation and actively opposed further Italian inroads into his territories. The same year that the Treaty of Uccialli was signed, the Italian government declared a protectorate over the entire Benadir coast on the Indian Ocean, which eventually became Italian Somaliland. In 1890 the Bay of Assab territory became the Italian colony of Eritrea, the forerunner of modern independent Eritrea. With operational bases on the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean coasts, Italy was now poised to enforce its interpretation of the Treaty of Uccialli. Italian military penetration of Ethiopia came to

210 Colonna, Vittoria

a sudden and disastrous end on March 1, 1896, when an Italian expeditionary force was surrounded and defeated by a large Ethiopian army at the Battle of Adowa. The defeat put an end to Italian colonial activity in East Africa for the time being, but the nationalist press kept the memory of that national humiliation alive. The Fascist regime would tout its conquest of Ethiopia in 1935–36 in the course of the ETHIOPIAN WAR as revenge for the humiliation suffered at Adowa 40 years before. In the interim, Italy seized the opportunity to acquire the territories of Cyrenaica and Tripolitania from the Ottoman Empire by force of arms in 1911–12 in the course of the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR. Italian control over these territories, which were merged to form the colony of Libya, was consolidated in the 1920s. The Ethiopian War resulted in the consolidation of the territories of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Italian Somaliland into a single entity called Italian East Africa and in the formal proclamation by Benito Mussolini of an Italian Empire. In WORLD WAR II the colonies served as bases for Italian military operations against British forces in Egypt and in East Africa. The loss of all of Italy’s colonies at the end of World War II was widely lamented in the press, but proved to be a great blessing in disguise. Italy’s colonies yielded none of the economic advantages anticipated by colonialists, and were a constant drain on the Italian economy. Italian Somaliland was a United Nations trust territory under Italian administration from 1950 to 1960, when it joined British Somaliland to form independent Somalia. Thus ended the last direct vestige of the Italian colonial empire, born of great power aspirations and lost providentially as a result of military defeat.

Colonna, Vittoria (1492–1547) writer, and friend and inspirer of Renaissance artists This prominent member of the COLONNA FAMILY gained attention as a writer, a friend of artists and scholars, and as the hostess of gatherings in Rome and Viterbo that attracted some of the

most important cultural figures of her generation. PIETRO BEMBO, BALDASSARRE CASTIGLIONE, MICHELANGELO, and the English cardinal Reginald Pole were among her friends and correspondents. Her literary output consists of some 300 sonnets, the first 100 of which she wrote to relieve her pain and distress at the death of her husband Francesco d’Avalos, a Spanish nobleman whom she married in 1509 and who died in 1525. She lived most of the rest of her life as a secular nun in seclusion in a Roman convent. The combination of sensitivity and highly polished style evident in the sonnets made her the leading woman poet in the eyes of her contemporaries. Literary critics of later generations were less kind to her, faulting her for a tightly controlled style that hindered spontaneity of expression. Having a deeply religious temperament, she was influenced by Calvinism but did not renounce her Roman Catholic faith. A representative of the new piety that stressed purity of faith, charity, and generosity, she avoided the public eye, contributing to the reform of the church with her writings, correspondence, and personal influence. Her late-life friendship and correspondence with Michelangelo, whom she met when she was 49 years old, has been the subject of intensive study pointing to the influence of her religious views on Michelangelo’s art.

Colonna family It was not uncommon for Italian noble families to claim direct descent from the nobility of ancient Rome. That claim may not be far-fetched in the case of the Colonna family, given its centuries-old association with the city of Rome. But that claim is not substantiated. The first documented references to the Colonnas date from the middle of the 11th century. From then on the family name figures prominently in the affairs of Rome and the PAPACY right up to our times. While many other Italian noble families sought to become ruling dynasties at the head of independent states, the Colonnas gained by serving the papacy. That does not mean that

Columbus, Christopher 211

relations with individual popes were always friendly. A member of the Colonna family, Stefano the Elder (1265–1349), was instrumental in consigning Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303) to King Philip the Fair of France, who then removed the papacy to Avignon during the socalled Babylonian Captivity of the Church (1309–78). Conflicts with individual popes did not lessen loyalty to the papacy as an institution. It was a member of the Colonna family, Pope Martin V (1417–31), who restored the papacy to Rome, ended feuding within the city, revived the lucrative pilgrim trade, and began the process of renovation that made Rome a center of Renaissance culture. During the Babylonian Captivity, the Colonnas ruled the city with the cooperation of other noble families, including their traditional rivals the ORSINI FAMILY. The Colonna family produced a series of notable CONDOTTIERI who served both the popes and the Spanish viceroys in southern Italy. Marcantonio II (1535–84) played an important role in the Christian victory over the Turks at the naval BATTLE OF LEPANTO (1571). The family maintains close ties to the Vatican to this day. It is a prime example of the so-called “black aristocracy” that prides itself on its loyalty to the CATHOLIC CHURCH. Princess Isabella Colonna (1889–1984) was regarded as the doyenne of high Roman society until her death. In recent years, the family has been torn by internal feuds and has attracted more than its share of media attention. It has set something of a record by maintaining its prominent social position over the course of nearly a thousand years.

Coltivatori Diretti See COLDIRETTI. Columbus, Christopher (1451–1506) navigator whose voyages opened the American continent to European settlement Known as Cristoforo Colombo by Italians and as Cristóbal Colón by Spaniards, Columbus’s ethnic identity has been the subject of considerable

controversy. Most scholars are satisfied with the accuracy of Columbus’s own assertion that he was born in Genoa, but his precise connection with the city of his birth and with Italy in general is far from clear. Still, visitors to Genoa are shown a Casa di Colombo that is reputed to be his place of birth. The mapping and seafaring traditions of the city may have had much to do with Columbus’s interest in navigation, but opportunities to sail and explore were far greater in the countries facing the Atlantic seaboard than in his native city. He turned to sailing after spending some years in his father’s trade as a weaver. He was shipwrecked near the Portuguese coast in 1476, joined his brother Bartholomew who was working as a mapmaker in Lisbon, worked for a Genoese merchant who was trafficking in sugar off the coast of Africa, and in the process developed the skills that would make him an accomplished mariner. Contrary to popular opinion, Columbus was not unique in believing that the earth was round and that the Indies could be reached by sailing westward. Those beliefs were actually shared in his time by most educated people. What distinguished Columbus was the single-minded determination with which he pursued his goal of reaching the Asian continent by traveling westward. Familiarity with the maps of the cartographer PAOLO TOSCANELLI may have confirmed his resolve. Repeatedly rebuffed by the rulers of Portugal and Spain, he finally prevailed upon King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain to sign a contract authorizing the famous expedition of three ships that sailed from the port of Palos on August 3, 1492. After an adventurous voyage, he landed probably on a small island in the Bahamas on October 12, 1492. The “discovery of America” opened up a new era in the history of the western world, for although Viking sailors had indeed already reached the new continent, it was Columbus’s voyage that initiated the era of regular contacts and exchanges between Europe and the Americas. For his achievement, the Spanish sovereigns named him admiral of the ocean sea, and governor of the lands he had

212 commedia dell’arte

discovered. He sailed again three times, in 1494, 1498, and 1502, carrying on further explorations of the Caribbean, reaching Trinidad, and probably the South American mainland around the mouth of the Orinoco River in present-day Venezuela. Columbus’s reputation suffered from failure to bring back the expected riches and from reports of poor administration of the lands under his jurisdiction. In 1500 a royal official had him transported back to Spain in chains and briefly imprisoned. By then, Columbus may have suspected that he had stumbled across a new continent, but persisted in thinking that further exploration might vindicate him. The fourth and final voyage failed to provide the evidence he was looking for that he had indeed reached Asia. He never regained the admiration and stature accorded him after his first voyage. Italians largely forgot him for centuries. Much later, in the course of the RISORGIMENTO, his name became a symbol of patriotic pride. Genoa erected a monument in his honor in 1846. Still later in the century, Italian-Americans adopted Columbus as a symbol of their ethnic identity, transforming Columbus Day into a celebration of the Italian identity and their collective contribution to American life.

tain Fracassa, Spaccamonte, Spaventa); the clever, thieving, or foolish servants (Arlecchino, Truffaldino, Pulcinella); the elderly, good-natured master (Balanzone); the flirtatious maid (Colombina, Diamantina); lovers young and old; and so on. Actors danced, performed acrobatics, and could address the audience directly. Puppetry also adopted characters and situations from commedia dell’arte. Highly popular, the great artistic drawback of commedia dell’arte was that its fixed characters did not allow for psychological insight and elaboration: the fool was always the fool, the villain the villain, and the outcome invariably predictable. Sophisticated audiences, and especially playwrights, began to tire of these stock situations and looked for more realistic portrayals of people and situations. Eighteenthcentury critics and authors like CARLO GOLDONI delivered some mighty blows against commedia dell’arte. The genre survived as a form of popular entertainment well into the 20th century, and contemporary social satirists like DARIO FO have adopted it successfully for their purposes.

Common Man’s Movement See UOMO QUALUNQUE (L’).

communism See PCI. commedia dell’arte This form of theatrical representation originated in Italy around the middle of the 16th century and spread rapidly to other parts of Europe. It was particularly popular in France, where it influenced the comical theater of Molière. Its name derives from the fact that its actors were highly skilled professionals who were expected to improvise or embroider on the plot sketched out by the playwright. That does not mean that the improvisation was extemporaneous, for actors prepared and rehearsed their roles and the pranks (lazzi) that they expected would make the audience laugh. In time actors specialized in the stock characters (maschere) that were typical of commedia dell’arte: the boastful soldiers (Cap-

Communist Refounding See PCI. Comunione e Liberazione This lay Catholic organization was founded in Lombardy in 1969. By 1979 it had about 60,000 members, all volunteers with a deeply rooted commitment to Catholic orthodoxy and particularly close to Pope JOHN PAUL II, whose theological views they uphold and defend. Its fundamentalist approach has appealed particularly to students in secondary schools and universities. The organization is active among urban workers and the poor. It runs its own social ser-

Confalonieri, Federico 213

vices and industrial and commercial enterprises that provide employment. It is a small but very visible and influential part of a network of lay Catholic associations in Italy that had about 4 million members in 1990. It exerted great influence on the old Christian Democratic Party (DC). Following the DC’s demise in 1994 it joined the more politically conservative United Democratic Christians of Rocco Buttiglione, which has supported the governments of SILVIO BERLUSCONI. However, the theological conservatism of Comunione e Liberazione does not necessarily translate into political conservatism. The organization also maintains ties with Catholic political figures that look to the Left.

Conciliatore (Il) See JOURNALISM; ROMANTICISM.

degree of political stability procured by the PEACE OF LODI reduced opportunities for profit and advancement through war in Italy. The French and Spanish invasions of the peninsula provided opportunities for Italian condottieri to fight in the service of foreign powers, as did many members of the COLONNA, MALATESTA, and ORSINI families. Highly regarded for their military skills, these latter-day condottieri lacked the military autonomy and political prospects of their predecessors, and operated within a hierarchical chain of command that called for greater discipline. The condottieri therefore represent an intermediate stage of military development between the mercenary armies of medieval times and modern armies based on training and hierarchical command. The presence of condottieri in the armies of Spain, France, and the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE gave Italians a military reputation that lasted well into the 17th century.

Concordat See ROMAN QUESTION. Confalonieri, Federico (1785–1846) condottieri Condottieri (“they who lead”) were familiar figures in the military landscape of medieval and Renaissance Italy. Soldiers of fortune who looked upon war as a business enterprise, they organized and led mercenary military formations (compagnie di ventura) on the basis of agreements that stipulated the size and armament of the force, the duration of service, and compensation. They were the product of the endemic state of warfare that prevailed among the many states of the peninsula in the 13th and 14th centuries. Famous condottieri included FRANCESCO SFORZA, Gattamelata (1370–1443), Niccolò Piccinino (1386–1444), and Bartolomeo Colleoni (1400–75). Successful condottieri often developed political ambitions of their own and sought to establish themselves as independent rulers, as did the Sforzas in Milan. Their approach to warfare was highly professional and their tactics relied more on thorough preparation and expert maneuver than bloody combat. The relative

educational and economic reformer, advocate of Italian independence Count Federico Confalonieri was a Lombard nobleman of liberal views. Born in Milan, married in 1806 to Teresa Casati (1787–1830), who also belonged to a prominent Milanese family, he refused to become part of the Milanese Napoleonic court where his wife was a lady-inwaiting. His known anti-Napoleonic sentiments earned him a place in the Lombard delegation that in 1814 tried unsuccessfully to win autonomy for Lombardy under French rule. Confalonieri also opposed Austrian rule after 1815. He traveled to France, England, and Belgium to familiarize himself with industrial and technological advances in the more economically developed countries of western Europe. In Lombardy he sponsored the progressive journal Il Conciliatore and proposed a broad range of economic and social reforms that included the improvement of popular education through the use of the Lancastrian method of teaching, steamship navigation on the Po River, gas illu-

214 Confindustria

mination, and mechanization of the textile industry. Convinced that Austrian rule was the chief impediment to reform, Confalonieri worked with the CARBONERIA to win independence for Lombardy. In the REVOLUTION of 1821 he cooperated with Piedmontese conspirators, assuming responsibility for forming a provisional government in Milan and orchestrating an anti-Austrian uprising. The Austrian authorities arrested and tried him, and condemned him to death, but the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. He was released in 1835 thanks to the intercession of his wife and her influential family, was deported to the United States (1837), returned to Europe and eventually to Milan, where he lived under police surveillance. In the last years of his life he traveled in western Europe and the Near East.

official status, no longer spoke for small producers and state enterprises, and reverted to its former role as a private lobby group. It was influential in the period of national reconstruction, when its laissez-faire philosophy informed government economic policy. It was on the defensive in the turbulent 1960s and early 1970s, but recovered much of its clout in the subsequent decades. It undermined the power of labor unions, organized the successful antilabor initiatives of the 1980s and 1990s, and is working to restructure Italian industry in the face of globalization and mounting competition from abroad. It maintains considerable influence as a pressure group, thanks to its organizational efficiency, political contacts, influence in the relevant government ministries, and the quality of its national leadership, which includes the top names of Italian industry.

Confindustria The General Confederation of Italian Industry, better known as Confindustria, is the chief lobby organization of Italian industrialists. Founded in Turin in 1910 to deal with organized labor and lobby the government, it was reorganized in 1919 on a national basis. From the beginning it reflected the views of the larger firms in the auto, metals, and mechanical industries. Small firms, textile and other manufacturers oriented toward export markets contested its claim to speak for all of industry. Confindustria prevailed thanks to several developments. One was the determination of Gino Olivetti (1880–1942), no relation to the manufacturers of office machines, who served as Confindustria secretary from 1919 to 1934. The other was the rise of FASCISM, which in 1926 granted to Confindustria the monopoly of industrial representation that it sought. As the sole legally recognized representative of all industrial employers, Confindustria had an official role in the system of Fascist CORPORATISM, and was entitled to representation in the organs of government. Its directives had the force of law in its areas of competence. After the fall of the Fascist regime, Confindustria lost its

Congress of Vienna (1814–1815) The aim of the Congress of Vienna was to establish a system of international relations that would prevent the recurrence of war and revolution. Although attended by the representatives of many governments, the congress was dominated by the major powers that had defeated NAPOLEON I, namely, Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, and Russia. France was also represented because the government of King Louis XVIII, which had replaced Napoleon’s government, was deemed an acceptable partner in the reconstruction of Europe. The congress paid considerable attention to the affairs of Italy. Territorial changes were designed to restore Austrian dominance of the Italian peninsula, which Napoleon had put completely under French dominance. Legitimacy, meaning that only pre-Napoleonic dynasties had a right to rule, was the principle that guided the congress. The principle of legitimacy was not extended to the Republics of GENOA, LUCCA, and VENICE, which existed before the Napoleonic Wars but were not restored by the Congress of Vienna. The regions of Lombardy and Venetia

constitutions 215

were incorporated into the AUSTRIAN EMPIRE as a royal possession called the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia. Members of the imperial HABSBURG family were put on the thrones of other Italian states: FERDINAND III became grand duke of Tuscany, MARIE LOUISE, daughter of the Austrian emperor, became duchess of Parma, and FRANCIS IV, who was also related to the Habsburgs, became duke of Modena. The other three major states of the peninsula, the KINGDOM OF SARDINIA, KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES, and the PAPAL STATES, relied on Austria for protection. Italy was thus divided into small states, none strong enough to challenge Austrian dominance. The Kingdom of Sardinia was the one state that gained considerable territory. Its king, VICTOR EMMANUEL I, had a well-deserved reputation as one of Europe’s most conservative monarchs. The congress authorized the Kingdom of Sardinia to annex the former territory of the Republic of Genoa, thereby broadening its access to the sea, enabling it to improve its economy, and strengthening its role as a buffer state against France. This was a case in which the principle of legitimacy was applied in tandem with the principle of balance of power. After 1815 Austria played the role of policeman, was the enemy of revolution, and served as the ultimate obstacle to Italian political independence and unity.

REVOLUTION.

He ended the conflict with France by negotiating the Concordat with NAPOLEON I (1801), which recognized Catholicism as the religion of the majority in France and provided for government payment of clergy. His resistance to further Napoleonic claims on the CATHOLIC CHURCH landed him in exile and prison. His persecution gave him renewed prestige and authority after Napoleon’s fall in 1814. As papal representative at the CONGRESS OF VIENNA, Consalvi won full territorial restoration of the PAPAL STATES. His principal concerns after 1815 were reform of the state administration, particularly the admission of laymen to public office, and a conciliatory policy toward supporters of the former Napoleonic regime. Unfortunately, he ran into the opposition of the political extremists known as the zelanti, who blocked his proposals. He welcomed the support of Austria, but resisted Prince Metternich’s claims to tighter control of papal policy. Consalvi’s influence ended with the election of the zelanti’s candidate, Pope Leo XII (1823–29). Consalvi died in January 1824, four months after the election of the new pope.

consociativismo See HISTORIC COMPROMISE. Constituent Assembly See CONSTITUTIONS.

Connubio See CAVOUR, CAMILLO BENSO, COUNT OF; RATTAZZI, URBANO.

Consalvi, Ercole (1757–1824) papal adviser and diplomat Serving as papal secretary of state from 1800 to 1823, Cardinal Consalvi steered papal policy during a particularly difficult period. He played a key role in securing the election of PIUS VII, who rewarded him by making him cardinal (without Consalvi’s having taken holy orders) and secretary of state. A political realist, Consalvi acted according to his belief that the world had changed profoundly as a result of the FRENCH

constitutions Written constitutions contain a set of rules regulating the conduct of government. Such documents are today an accepted feature of political life in western democracies. However, their acceptance came after long and often violent struggles to limit the power of absolute monarchs. In the 18th century only a few progressive monarchs, most notably PETER LEOPOLD of Tuscany, considered granting constitutions, but were quickly dissuaded from implementing such projects by fear of revolution. Constitutions were adopted in Spain and Sicily in 1812 and in France in 1814. These became models for Italian liber-

216 constitutions

als in the 19th century. The Spanish constitution was favored by the more democratic elements because it was founded on the principle of popular sovereignty, provided a fairly broad suffrage, and an elected parliament. The French charter appealed to more moderate elements because it was in the form of a royal concession and was based on a narrow suffrage and a bicameral legislature, one branch of which was elected and the other appointed by the king. The Sicilian constitution also provided for an elected legislature based on narrow suffrage, partial compensation for abolished feudal rights, and administrative autonomy for the island. It was revoked by the Bourbon government in 1816, but it, too, remained a point of reference for 19th-century liberals. SECRET SOCIETIES and liberal groups called for constitutions in the REVOLUTIONS of 1820–21, 1830, and 1848. The rulers of Naples, PiedmontSardinia, and Tuscany granted constitutions in 1848, but only the Piedmontese constitution (Statuto) survived the defeat of revolution. Granted by King CHARLES ALBERT in February 1848, it gave real powers over budgets and legislation to a lower house of parliament (chamber of deputies) elected on the basis of a narrow suffrage, provided for an upper house (senate) appointed by the king, and gave the king command of the armed forces, war, peace, and foreign policy. The Statuto was the fundamental law of the Kingdom of SARDINIA from 1848 to 1861 and of the kingdom of Italy from 1861 until the monarchy was abolished in 1946. It did not provide for the principle of ministerial responsibility to parliament, which nevertheless became generally accepted political practice by the end of the 19th century, when prime ministers and their cabinets were expected to resign if they lost the support of the majority on important issues in the elected chamber. Along with the broadening of the franchise in 1882, 1912, and 1919, the Statuto served as the basis of an increasingly democratic system of government until FASCISM changed the system of voting and political representation after 1922.

The king’s appointment of BENITO MUSSOLINI as prime minister in October 1922 was strictly speaking a constitutional act since the Statuto gave the king the power of appointment, but it was against the normal practice of appointing a leader of a party well represented in parliament. The Statuto remained the fundamental law of the land throughout the Fascist period. Although Fascist legislation and Mussolini’s ambition diminished the power of the king, the retention of the Statuto gave the king a constitutional basis for dismissing Mussolini in July 1943, thus bringing to an end the period of Fascist rule. The Statuto lapsed when a majority voted against the monarchy and for a republican form of government in the national plebiscite and elections of June 1946. The constituent assembly elected by the voters framed the constitution of the Italian republic. The republican constitution went into effect on January 1, 1948, and is still the fundamental law of the land. The main objective of the framers was to establish a system of government that would provide the strongest safeguards against a recurrence of fascism and dictatorship. It defines Italy as “a democratic Republic based on work,” guarantees civil liberties, free enterprise, the separation of CHURCH AND STATE, recognizes the family as a natural association founded on marriage, renounces war, provides for a bicameral parliament elected by universal suffrage and for local and regional autonomies, gives a largely ceremonial role to the office of president of the republic, vests executive power in the office of prime minister and the council of ministers (cabinet), establishes a supreme court to judge the constitutionality of laws and popular referenda to affirm or repeal contested laws, and provides for a parliamentary procedure to amend the constitution. National unity and the republican form of government are not subject to amendment. Not all provisions of the republican constitution were implemented immediately. Provisions for regional governance were not fully implemented until the 1970s. The concept of separa-

cooperativism 217

tion of church and state required more specific definition. In February 1984 the Italian government and the Holy See negotiated a new Concordat to replace that of 1929 that had been endorsed by the constitution of 1948. The new agreement omitted the reference to Catholicism as the sole religion of the Italian state, made religious instruction in state schools optional, and abolished state subsidies for the clergy. Critics blame the constitution for a weak executive, a poor sense of the state, neglect of the public interest, bureaucratic corruption, and insufficient separation of church and state. Still, there are many things that can be said in its favor. It has effectively dispelled the threat of fascism and personal dictatorship, made government broadly representative, and protected individual freedoms. It gave the state the power it needed to deal with political TERRORISM. Since the early 1990s there has been much debate over the future of the present constitution and the nature of a “second republic” with a different constitutional foundation: a strong presidency, a twoparty system, administrative decentralization, and less bureaucracy. While public opinion seems to appreciate the gains realized with the current constitutional system, there is also strong public support for changing the system of governance.

cooperativism Cooperatives of consumers and producers have a long history in Italy. Able to function only under a political system that protects freedom of association, cooperatives emerged first in Piedmont-Sardinia under the CONSTITUTION of 1848. Under its provisions, workers were free to organize mutual aid societies, labor unions, and cooperatives. The first cooperatives, in the retail trades, provided merchandise at cut prices. Next were producer cooperatives among glassmakers, tailors, printers, stonemasons, and carpenters. They produced at competitive prices and provided employment, social services, and pensions. Government authorities kept a close watch on worker cooperatives, suspecting them of sub-

version, but allowed them to function as long as they did not engage in political activities. Cooperatives spread to other regions after the unification of Italy. A notable development of the postunification period was the movement to form popular savings banks and rural credit unions in the regions of Venetia, where liberal and Catholic organizers competed for the allegiance of workers and peasants. Socialists also came forward to promote cooperatives among landless day workers and sharecroppers of the Po Valley and Romagna areas. Various legislative acts passed in the 1880s recognized mutual aid societies and cooperatives as juridical entities that could enter into contracts and assume collective responsibilities. In 1893 the National League of Cooperatives was set up, representing 117 out of an estimated 2,500 cooperatives active in the country. By the end of WORLD WAR I the league represented 2,321 cooperatives. The National Confederation of Cooperatives founded in 1919 set out to organize Catholic cooperatives throughout the country. The cooperative movement as a whole grew enormously in the years 1919–22. Its strong political coloration aroused fears that the movement could become the cutting edge of economic and political revolution. The growth of the cooperative movement was checked by FASCISM, which directed its attacks against both socialist and Catholic cooperatives. But once established, the Fascist regime chose to control and regulate rather than eliminate cooperatives. In 1926 the Fascist National Agency for Cooperation took over 7,131 cooperatives, which grew to 14,576 by 1942. Cooperatives emerged from the devastation of WORLD WAR II with enough political clout to win a secure place in the postwar economy. The three-way organizational split among cooperatives associated with left-wing parties (PCI and PSI), Catholic cooperatives associated with the DC, and cooperatives associated with the PRI and PSDI later diminished their influence. Nevertheless, cooperatives have flourished economically, adopting modern methods of management and

218 Coppi, Fausto

responding well to changing market demands. What they have lost is the ability cherished by the pioneers of the movement to change the nature of the economy from one based on laissez-faire principles to one based on the principle of association. For the approximately 500,000 workers of about 160,000 cooperatives currently operating, cooperatives represent an unqualified economic success.

Coppi, Fausto See SPORT. Corfù Crisis See FASCISM. corporatism Corporatism, or corporativism, is an ideology of cooperation that cuts across class lines, uniting workers, entrepreneurs, and government officials in economic activities, carried out in the public interest or the interests of the state. Corporatism aims at eliminating conflicts of interest among labor, business, and government. FASCISM adopted and institutionalized corporatism, but the origins of the ideology predate the rise of fascism. Catholic social doctrine embodied corporatist principles derived from Christian notions of spirituality, charity, and human solidarity. An idealization of medieval guilds as fundamentally harmonious associations of employers and workers was also part of Catholic corporatist thinking. The encyclicals of Pope LEO XIII and the writings of GIUSEPPE TONIOLO are important sources of Catholic corporatist doctrine. Nationalists also adopted corporatism as a means of securing domestic harmony, developing the economy, and strengthening the state. Both Catholic and nationalist corporatism aimed at combating the influence of socialism and eliminating class conflict. The Fascist corporatist state was the brainchild of social theoreticians like ALFREDO ROCCO and GIUSEPPE BOTTAI. Both were determined to give fascism a social doctrine that transcended the

perceived limitations of economic liberalism and socialism, emphasized social cooperation, appealed to ideal values, and enhanced the power of the state. Before corporatist reforms could be enacted, the Fascist regime had to eliminate domestic opposition, gain control of organized labor, and reassure and pressure employers into accepting a system of economic controls. The enactment of corporatist reforms was therefore gradual. It began in 1926 with the passage of laws eliminating independent labor unions, and creating the Ministry of Corporations. A national council of corporations was set up in 1930 as an advisory body on economic questions. Twentytwo national corporations were set up in 1934, each with jurisdiction over a specific sector of the economy, regulated by councils representing labor, management, and government, and coordinated at the top by the national council and Ministry of Corporations. The regulatory powers of the 22 corporations were limited, but they did play a role in labor relations, helped in the formation of business cartels, and conducted studies for the benefit of government experts. The corporations were caught in the contradictions of Fascist economic policy. On the one hand, the proliferation of government agencies interfered with the work of the corporations by dispersing decision-making powers in different directions. On the other, the policy of AUTARKY adopted by the regime required even more centralized economic planning than could be provided by 22 separate corporations. A final reform in 1938 transformed parliament’s chamber of deputies into the chamber of fasces and corporations, its members now representing the corporations, the Fascist Party, and other officially recognized associations. By that time, however, parliament had lost all meaningful legislative functions. The entire corporative structure was abolished after the fall of the Fascist regime in 1943, but an expanded bureaucracy and increased red tape were lasting legacies of Fascist corporatism. Social theoreticians have also seen its traces in the practice of formal and informal coopera-

Corridoni, Filippo 219

tion of private business, organized labor, and government officials that is a feature of all modern economies. That form of “societal corporatism” is significantly different in structure and scope from the official institutionalized “state corporatism” and is best seen as a distinct and separate form of corporative interaction with its own historical and economic derivations. In any case, in whatever form it takes, corporatism has always appealed almost exclusively to intellectuals and social engineers who are intrigued by its theoretical possibilities. Unlike other modern “isms,” corporatism is an ideology without a mass following.

Corradini, Enrico (1865–1931) journalist, founder and inspirer of the nationalist movement This Florentine political writer and journalist played a major role in orienting Italian NATIONALISM toward colonial and territorial expansion. A graduate of the University of Florence, he began as a high school teacher of literature, joined the cultural battle against philosophical POSITIVISM, fell under the spell of GABRIELE D’ANNUNZIO, and like D’Annunzio was not content with a purely aesthetic approach to life. The Italian military defeat at the BATTLE OF ADOWA (1896) drew him into public debate. Corradini made avenging that defeat the message of his writings. He sought to do so by promoting a sense of nationalist pride and cohesiveness by applying the socialist notion of class struggle to international relations. According to his creed, the world was divided between rich and poor nations, just like nations were divided between the rich and poor classes. Rich and poor nations competed for the world’s resources. Rich bourgeois nations like Great Britain and France that had grown rich with empire prevented “proletarian nations” like Italy from claiming their rightful share of territory and resources. Italy was the chief proletarian nation. It was hampered internally by class divisions and externally by the will of wealthy nations. It must overcome the former by seeking

colonies for the settlement of its poor and the latter by protecting its nascent industries necessary for warfare from foreign competition. It must prepare for the inevitable showdown that would simultaneously affirm its status as a great power and solve the social question. Corradini singled out Italian emigration as a national calamity and humiliation, arguing that colonies would provide places of settlement where Italians could work under the protection of their own flag. His most important publication was the review Il Regno (1903–06), which touted the message that Italy could overcome scarcity of natural resources by an act of collective will power. He was a founder of the ITALIAN NATIONALIST ASSOCIATION (1910), supported the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR (1911–12), Italian intervention in WORLD WAR I, and FASCISM. He collaborated with the Fascist regime, served as senator, and helped restructure the Fascist state according to the theory of CORPORATISM. Private papers that came to light after his death showed that he disapproved of the personality cult surrounding BENITO MUSSOLINI. The Fascist regime eulogized him as a national hero and precursor of fascism.

Corridoni, Filippo (1888–1915) political activist of the extreme Left and revolutionary syndicalist A political activist of the extreme Left, Corridoni was drawn to radical ideologies that promised social regeneration by violent means. His political itinerary took him from Mazzinian republicanism to socialism and REVOLUTIONARY SYNDICALISM. Inspired by Georges Sorel’s faith in the revolutionary fervor of the working class and the myth of the general strike as the weapon of revolution, Corridoni rejected the Italian Socialist Party (PSI) and the leadership of organized labor as reformist, and founded his own Syndicalist Union (1913), with which he hoped to wrest control of organized labor from the reformist General Confederation of Labor. He failed in that objective, but his personal charisma, public eloquence, and courage made him a highly visible

220 Corriere della Sera

and popular figure at a relatively young age. When his hopes of revolution were dashed by the failure of the RED WEEK uprisings of June 1914, he put his faith in a general war that would shake the system to its foundation and launch the social revolution. When BENITO MUSSOLINI came around to that view in October 1914, it looked like the making of an alliance between two charismatic leaders. But Corridoni did not live long enough to see the results of that alliance. Acting on his conviction that war was the necessary prelude to revolution, he volunteered for military service and died in combat in October 1915. The Fascist regime hailed him as a martyr and precursor.

Corriere della Sera See ALBERTINI, LUIGI; JOURNALISM.

Corsica Part of France since 1769, the island of Corsica was previously under the nominal rule of the republic of GENOA. Genoese policy excluded natives from administrative and political office, attacked the seigneurial rights of the nobility, and favored commercial elements in the hope of creating a new social class loyal to the republic. But Genoese efforts could not control the fierce family feuds that plagued the island. Its state of chronic revolt persuaded the Genoese government to cede the island to France in 1769. Pasquale Paoli (1735–1807) emerged as the hero in the Corsican struggle for independence, a struggle that he waged against both Genoa and France until he was forced into exile in England. Corsica’s most famous figure is NAPOLEON I, who quickly gave up on his family’s association with the cause of Corsican independence and identified entirely with France. During the RISORGIMENTO, Corsica served as a staging ground for operations by SECRET SOCIETIES fighting for Italian independence. The island’s cultural and linguistic affinities with Italy have attracted the attention of Italian nationalists. The Corsicans

have shown little interest in being part of Italy, and relations between Italy and France have been friendly for the most part. FASCISM was the exception. In the late 1930s Fascist propaganda claimed Corsica for Italy, and Italian troops invaded the island in 1942.

corso forzoso See CURRENCY. cosa nostra See MAFIA. Cossiga, Francesco (1928– ) Christian Democratic leader and president of the republic Born in Sardinia, Cossiga was active in the Catholic movement as a university student, rose through the ranks of the Christian Democratic Party (DC) to hold the highest office in the land, and served as president of the republic from 1985 to 1992. He joined the DC in 1945, was elected to the chamber of deputies in 1958, and held his first ministerial post in 1966. He was interior minister in charge of national security in 1976–78. The intensification of TERRORISM during his watch, culminating in the kidnapping and assassination of ALDO MORO, who had been Cossiga’s political mentor, led to his resignation from that post the day after the kidnapping. That gesture saved his reputation as a man willing to acknowledge his responsibility for failing to protect Moro and the country from terrorists. He went on to serve unremarkably as prime minister in 1979–80 and to hold the post of senate president. He was elected president of the republic in 1985 with strong support across the political spectrum. The presidency brought out aspects of Cossiga’s personality that had not been evident earlier. Public reticence gave way to talkativeness. He clearly meant to use the moral power of the nation’s highest office to push for political reforms. His method was to address the country directly through a series of pronouncements (esternazioni) that drew attention to the inade-

Craxi, Bettino 221

quacies of the political system, parliamentary misbehavior, financial corruption, and the influence of organized crime. His persistent efforts played a role in getting the process of reform underway in the early 1990s. In the process, Cossiga acquired a reputation as a political maverick and loose cannon. The image of volatility was reinforced by his unexpected decision in April 1992 to resign from the presidency just 10 weeks before the normal expiration of his mandate. That same year he was made senator for life. The breakup of the DC in 1994 left Cossiga at political loose ends, but in 1998 he tried to revive the party with a new name, the Democratic Union for the Republic (UDR). With 5 percent of the seats in the chamber of deputies, UDR gave the former communist MASSIMO D’ALEMA the majority that he needed to form his center-left government in October of that year.

and parliamentary action. In 1881 he founded the newspaper Avanti! to spread the socialist gospel. In 1882 he became the first socialist to win a seat in parliament. In 1892 he helped form the first national party of workers, from which sprang the Italian Socialist Party (PSI). He encouraged workers to organize and fought in parliament for the right to strike. Costa obtained the ultimate seal of political respectability when he was elected vice president of the chamber of deputies. Socialism by then was an integral part of the political system of GIOVANNI GIOLITTI. The debate over the nature, tactics, and goals of socialism was still going on when Costa died. His successors struggled to reconcile the tactic of legal action that he espoused with that of violent revolution that he rejected.

Council of Trent See TRENT, COUNCIL OF. Costa, Andrea (1851–1910) social activist and founder of Italian socialism Costa has a strong claim to being considered the founder of Italian socialism. Born to a family of modest means in the Po Valley town of Imola, his passion for politics developed during his first year at the University of Bologna, which he left when he was denied a scholarship. His journalistic ventures and organizational activities among workers brought him regional prominence. Costa’s stand in support of the Paris Commune led to a break with GIUSEPPE MAZZINI and the republican movement. Costa turned to ANARCHISM as a seemingly more promising movement for the Left, and was jailed for his subversive activities (1874–76). After his release, Costa left for Paris, where he discovered Marxism and began his long relationship with the Russian radical ANNA KULISCIOFF. The failure of repeated attempts at insurrection convinced Costa that the use of violence discredited the cause of revolution and strengthened the opposition. Costa decided that the best way to safeguard the interests of workers and advance the cause of socialism was to adopt the legal tactics of large-scale organization

Counter-reformation See CATHOLIC REFORMATION.

Craxi, Bettino (1934–2000) Socialist Party leader, prime minister, and political outcast Born in Milan, the son of a lawyer, christened Benedetto but always known as Bettino, Craxi was drawn to socialist politics from an early age by family tradition. He joined the Socialist Party (PSI) at age 18, and briefly attended Milan University law school. He became leader of the Socialist Party in 1976, put his followers in key positions, reorganized the party, and distanced it from communism. The 11.4 percent of the vote that his party received in the elections of 1983 positioned him to head a coalition government with the numerically dominant but divided Christian Democratic Party (DC). He was the first socialist to serve as prime minister. His four-year government lasted until March 1987, setting a postwar record for longevity. Those four years were marked by economic growth, rising con-

222 Crimean War

sumption of goods, and increase in leisure time. An unusually active foreign policy saw the commitment of Italian troops to Lebanon as part of an international peacekeeping force, a controversial decision to accept NATO nuclear missiles on Italian soil, and a rare clash with the United States over the arrest of Arab terrorists by American authorities on Italian soil. On the sensitive issue of Middle East policy, Craxi tilted toward support for the Palestinians. In the elections of 1987 held shortly after Craxi’s resignation as prime minister, the Socialist Party reached its highest vote of 14.3 percent. His tenure was nevertheless highly controversial. Suggestions of political corruption dogged Craxi because of the system of patronage and political contributions that he controlled. Socialists did gain much influence in government and state-run institutions during the Craxi years. The attacks against him intensified as his power and popularity grew, stirred by the fears of rival parties and figures. The 1992 investigation of the MANI PULITE (Clean Hands) bribery scandal in Milan in 1992 eventually implicated Craxi and he resigned as PSI secretary in February 1993. He fled to Tunisia in May 1994 to avoid prosecution in what he charged was a politically motivated trial. He was subsequently convicted of graft and corruption and an international warrant was issued for his arrest, but he was never extradited. He died of a heart attack in Tunisia.

Crimean War Fought in 1853–56, the Crimean War pitted Russia against a coalition consisting of the Ottoman Empire, Great Britain, France, and the Kingdom of SARDINIA. The Kingdom of Sardinia intervened in the war in January 1855, dispatched a corps of 15,000 troops, and sent Prime Minister CAVOUR to the Congress of Paris that ended the war. Italian intervention was solicited by Great Britain and France partly to reassure Austria that it would have nothing to fear on its Italian border if it joined the anti-Russian coalition and partly for the additional troops that Sardinia could provide. The Sardinian contingent of 15,000 troops fought one significant engagement and

performed well militarily. Like all other combatants, the Sardinians suffered more casualties from disease than from combat. The onceaccepted interpretation that Cavour deliberately sought involvement in the war to advance the cause of Italian unification is not borne out by recent research. It seems rather that the French and British pressured the Kingdom of Sardinia into going to war. There were no immediate gains for Sardinia, but the fact that it was represented at the Congress of Paris, that the great powers acknowledged the existence of an “Italian Question,” and that Austria was left diplomatically isolated did indirectly advance the cause of Italian independence. Closer relations with France yielded political dividends in 1859 when France and Sardinia went to war against Austria, while Great Britain looked on the unification of Italy with benevolence.

Crispi, Francesco (1808–1901) Risorgimento patriot, leader of the democratic opposition, and prime minister Crispi’s career took him from the role of political conspirator to the office of prime minister in the course of a life filled with controversy and marked by unfulfilled promise. He was born into a Sicilian family of grain merchants of Albanian origin. At the University of Palermo he studied law and literature, received a law degree (1837), and pursued a career in journalism. He moved to Naples in 1845 to take a judgeship, but returned to Sicily after revolution broke out there in January 1848. As a journalist and member of the Sicilian parliament, he supported the separatist movement that sought to break ties with Naples. As a political exile in Turin, Paris, London, and other European cities from 1849, he immersed himself in the politics of the national movement, abandoning Sicilian separatism, and identifying with the republicanism of GIUSEPPE MAZZINI, with whom Crispi collaborated closely until 1859. That year marked the beginning of his turn toward the HOUSE OF SAVOY and the monarchy as the institution most likely to succeed in unifying Italy. In 1860 he played a

Croce, Benedetto 223

key role in persuading GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI to lead the famed expedition of the Thousand that freed Sicily from Bourbon rule. He was elected to the first Italian parliament in 1861 and in all successive legislatures for the rest of his life. In 1864 he took the public stand that “the monarchy unites us, a republic would divide us,” which signaled the final break with Mazzini. As a member of the parliamentary opposition, he criticized both the governments of the HISTORICAL RIGHT and LIBERAL LEFT. Although he was himself part of the Liberal Left, and served as president of the chamber of deputies when the Liberal Left was in power, he joined the so-called PENTARCHY that opposed the Liberal Left governments led by AGOSTINO DEPRETIS. When Depretis died in office in July 1887, Crispi succeeded him as prime minister and foreign minister. He dominated the political scene until 1896, serving as prime minister and in various other capacities for all but almost three years (1891–93). With his carefully cultivated image as a man of destiny, Crispi sought to govern energetically. In his first years in office his government enacted many desirable reforms. He took steps to improve the functioning of the courts, broadened the franchise in local elections, introduced programs of public sanitation, reformed the welfare and penal systems, and sponsored laws for the protection of emigrants. More controversially, he also took steps to increase the powers of the executive at the expense of parliament and strengthened the authority of PREFECTS. His foreign policy was assertive, actively pursuing recognition for Italy as a major power, engaging in a tariff war with France, and seeking a close understanding with Germany. After some hesitation, he also backed the policy of colonial expansion. The negative consequences of the trade war with France and a deteriorating domestic economy forced his resignation as prime minister in February 1891, but he returned in December 1893 with an enhanced reputation as man of action and savior of the country. However, this time he had to face unprecedented domestic and foreign difficulties. He declared martial law to repress rebellions in

Sicily and central Italy, antagonized powerful industrialists and landowners by proposing new forms of taxation to balance the budget, and had to confront the political storm that followed the defeat of Italian troops in Adowa in March 1896. Forced out of office and subjected to official investigations to ascertain responsibility for that military debacle, he lived in retirement until his death in 1901. Crispi remains something of an enigma, a democrat with irresistible authoritarian impulses, a patriot turned aggressive nationalist, a villain to the Left and a hero to the Right.

Critica (La) See CROCE, BENEDETTO. Critica Sociale See PSI; TURATI, FILIPPO. Croce, Benedetto (1866–1952) leading philosopher and public figure Considered the most prominent Italian intellectual of his generation, Croce’s cultural influence was felt in many fields in Italy and abroad. Primarily a philosopher, he also influenced historical scholarship, literary criticism, art, and politics. Born in the small town of Pescasseroli in the Abruzzo region to a well-off family of landowners, in 1883 he lost his parents in an earthquake, went to live with his uncle SILVIO SPAVENTA in Rome (1883–86), where he attended the university and was influenced by the Marxist theoretician ANTONIO LABRIOLA. He then settled in Naples, where he lived and worked for the rest of his life as an independent scholar. He never sought or held an academic appointment, traveled widely, and developed a keen interest in contemporary politics and political ideologies. His essay On the Materialistic Interpretation of History (1896) rejected materialism as a guide to the interpretation of history and signaled a break with Labriola. Croce questioned not only the validity of Marxist historical analysis but, more generally, of POSITIVISM as a way of understanding reality, turning instead to an idealist philosophy of Hegelian origin.

224 Crusca, Accademia della

Benedetto Croce (Library of Congress)

In his journal La Critica (1903–44) Croce carried out a campaign to breathe new life into Italian culture, combat the influence of positivism, and assert the primacy of spirit over matter. In this and other ventures he had the backing of his then friend and disciple GIOVANNI GENTILE and the publisher Giovanni Laterza (1873–1943). Their intent was to form a political leadership for the 20th century. Croce was appointed senator in 1910 and served as minister of public education (1920–21), but political activism was not his ideal. He saw himself rather as a cultural presence influencing politics from the outside. He broke with the Socialist Party (PSI) openly in

1911, charging that socialist agitation intensified class antagonisms and undermined the spiritual unity of the country. He later opposed FASCISM as a historical aberration. Croce saw history as the progressive realization of liberal ideals and as “the religion of liberty.” He looked to the state as the impartial enforcer of the law, believed in private property, individual freedom, open debate, and political pluralism. His liberalism did not go as far as to embrace political democracy and majority rule. That limit explains his initial sympathy for fascism as a necessary corrective to democracy, but then his later opposition once it became clear that fascism meant the arbitrary and repressive use of power. Croce’s liberalism also made him anticlerical. He criticized papal policy for its hostility toward the Italian liberal state and its sympathy for fascism. Croce’s long-standing opposition to Marxism reasserted itself after 1945 when he saw resurgent communism as a threat to liberal values. But after 1945 Croce’s cultural influence was challenged by the rising influence of Marxism, particularly in the version elaborated by ANTONIO GRAMSCI. It can be said with much justification that for about two decades after 1945 Italian intellectuals were either Crocean or Gramscian. Croce’s critical appraisal of his own ideas appears in Contributo alla critica di me stesso (1915), translated and published in English by his friend and admirer, the philosopher R. G. Collingwood as An Autobiography (1927, repr. 1970). For his interpretation of history see his History of Europe in the Nineteenth Century (1933) and Storia d’Italia dal 1871 al 1915 (History of Italy from 1871 to 1915, 1928).

Crusca, Accademia della See ACADEMIES; BEMBO, PIETRO.

Cuccia, Enrico (1908–2000) financier and business facilitator Cuccia is regarded as the most influential Italian banker of the second half of the 20th century, a role partially disguised by his public reticence.

Cuoco, Vincenzo 225

Born in Rome of Sicilian parents, he started out working for the BANCA D’ITALIA. In 1934 he joined the recently established Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (IRI), a state-owned holding company that dominated the public sector of the economy. In 1938 Cuccia joined the staff of the Banca Commerciale Italiana, the most prestigious of Italy’s banking institutions. In 1939 he married the daughter of IRI’s founder and chairman, ALBERTO BENEDUCE. In 1946 Beneduce appointed his son-in-law to start up Mediobanca, a credit institution that extended medium-term credit to big industry. Using its leverage as lender, Mediobanca arranged major financial operations, including the 1966 merger of the Montecatini and Edison firms to form the chemical giant MONTEDISON. Cuccia proved extremely adept at arranging complicated financial deals among the giants of Italian industry. In the 1980s he helped revitalize FIAT, arranging for the buyback of shares sold by Fiat’s owners, the Agnelli family, to Libyan leader Muammar elQaddafi in 1976. Cuccia’s power began to wane in the 1990s with the gradual privatization of the state-controlled enterprises, which eroded Cuccia’s role as effective broker between the private and public sectors. He remained honorary chairman of Mediobanca until his death in Rome in June 2000. In a bizarre aftermath, grave robbers snatched Cuccia’s body and held it for ransom. Upon being apprehended, they explained that they had settled for Cuccia dead because he had been too well guarded while alive.

Cultura Sociale (La) See MURRI, ROMOLO. Cuoco, Vincenzo (1770–1823) historian and political writer Cuoco was a participant and first historian of the period 1799–1815, which witnessed revolution, and the rise and fall of NAPOLEON I. He was born in a small town in the region of Molise, the son of a lawyer who wanted him to follow in his own professional footsteps. Cuoco went to the Uni-

versity of Naples in 1787, where he took up the study of economics and political philosophy. He avoided politics until he became a sympathizer of the PARTHENOPEAN REPUBLIC proclaimed in 1799. Although he took no active part in the government, his sympathies for the republic brought him a sentence of exile when the Bourbon monarchy was temporarily restored in 1800. After visiting Marseilles and Paris, in 1804 he settled in Milan, where he founded the periodical Giornale Italiano. His publication raised and publicized the issue of national identity and independence, earning Cuoco a place among the forerunners of the RISORGIMENTO. His Saggio sulla Rivoluzione napoletana (Essay on the Neapolitan revolution, 1801), assessed the events of 1799 from a moderate perspective that favored gradual change and rejected revolution. According to Cuoco, the JACOBINS who led the revolution of 1799 pursued utopian goals, were out of touch with the common people, and were responsible for its failure. He described the revolution as “passive” because it disregarded the needs of the people, who turned against it at the first opportunity. His chief complaint was that the Jacobins had ignored history, putting too much distance between themselves and the masses that were attached to the traditions of the kingdom. In spite of this assessment, Cuoco was no populist reformer, for he also believed that the most needed reforms were those that would stimulate the economy, and not reforms that would give land to the landless or provide support for the poor. Cuoco’s ideal of good government was the monarchy of JOSEPH BONAPARTE and his successor, JOACHIM MURAT, whom Cuoco served faithfully in various administrative capacities. The RESTORATION did not deprive him of all his offices but Cuoco, emotionally frail, became increasingly despondent in his remaining years. His influence helped steer the movement for national unification in the moderate direction that it took under the guidance of CAVOUR. Leftist writers and theoreticians used Cuoco’s concept of “passive revolution” against revolutionaries deemed too timid to mobilize the masses.

226 Curcio, Renato

Curcio, Renato See RED BRIGADES. currency The Italian currency is the lira, a name derived from the Roman word for pound (libra), The libra, weighing approximately 325 grams, was used as the reference point for the weight of coins in circulation. When Charlemagne introduced uniform coinage in the eighth century, the lira became the unit of currency throughout his empire, which included Italy as far south as Rome. For centuries, however, the lira remained only a nominal currency. No coins actually bore that name, but the lira (pound), or fraction thereof, referred to the amount of metal actually present in a coin. In the Middle Ages the lira was usually defined as 340 grams of silver. In 1745 the Republic of GENOA minted the first coin that was actually called a lira. During Napoleonic times and later in the 19th century, the terms lira and franc were often used interchangeably, the amount of precious metal in the lira varying, however, from state to state, and the lira remaining a unit of measure rather than an actual coin. The lira of Piedmont-Sardinia became the Italian lira after national unification. The Italian lira was a silver coin weighing 4.5 grams, equivalent to 0.29 grams of gold, with a gold/silver ratio of 1:15.5. The lira remained on this bimetallic standard until 1866, when the government was forced to abandon the convertibility of the lira into gold (corso forzoso) to meet its obligations and avoid bankruptcy. By the 1890s the lira had regained its value and the government repealed the corso forzoso, or policy of nonconvertibility. In 1900–14 the exchange rate of the lira was pegged at five to the U.S. dollar, and this is considered to be the lira’s period of greatest stability and prestige. The cost of WORLD WAR I and the postwar economic crisis triggered an unprecedented inflation and depreciation of the lira. The Fascist regime took up the defense of the lira (Bat-

tle of the Lira) in 1926–27, partly for financial reasons and partly for reasons of national prestige. It stabilized the lira at the exchange rate called QUOTA 90. Monetary stability kept inflation at bay and gave the regime the domestic stability that it needed to conduct an aggressive FOREIGN POLICY. The defeat of the Fascist regime in WORLD WAR II brought on an unprecedented monetary crisis. The value of the lira plunged as the Allies issued vast amounts of occupation currency, inflation ran rampant, and efforts at price controls actually stimulated a black market with unregulated prices. Recovery was slow and difficult in the new international economy dominated by the American dollar. Strengthening the currency was a primary objective of postwar economic policy, and by the early 1950s the lira achieved a stable exchange rate of approximately 620 to the dollar, a rate that remained stable until the early 1970s. Since then, the lira has floated broadly in response to changing domestic and international economic developments. In the late 1990s the government was able to meet the monetary requirements for admission to the EUROPEAN UNION by curtailing spending, limiting public borrowing, and raising taxes. Like the currencies of other European Union members, the Italian lira was gradually replaced by the euro, the new European Union currency. The lira went out of circulation officially in March 2002.

Curtatone, Battle of See MONTANELLI, GIUSEPPE.

Custoza, Battle of See CIALDINI, ENRICO; LA MARMORA, ALFONSO; WARS OF NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE.

Cyrenaica See COLONIALISM.

D D’Alema, Massimo (1949–

)

leader of the political Left and prime minister Born into a family long associated with the Italian Communist Party (PCI), D’Alema visited the Soviet Union as a young man, headed the Young Communist League, and served as chief editor of the party newspaper L’Unità (1988–90). Following the breakup of the Communist Party in 1991, D’Alema was founding member of its successor, the DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF THE LEFT. Formally renouncing communism, D’Alema headed the new party and became its chief spokesman for a new brand of democracy and popular government based on economic growth, political freedom, and social justice. He became prime minister in October 1998, the first former communist to occupy that post. He faced the difficult task of meeting stringent budget requirements to qualify Italy for entry in the European Monetary Union on January 1, 1999. His government met that goal, but not without severe disagreements with its coalition partner, the unreconstructed communists of Rifondazione Comunista, whose dissent weakened the governing coalition. D’Alema’s government pursued an unusually active foreign policy, committing Italian troops to peacekeeping missions in Albania and Bosnia, and combat planes to the 1999 NATO campaign against Slobodan Milosˇevi´c in Kosovo, as well as assuming responsibility for policing parts of Kosovo province. The government also had to deal with a short-lived crisis in relations with the United States after an American air force jet brought down a cable car carrying 20 tourists in February 1999. D’Alema’s budget-cutting measures alienated many of his supporters on the Left, including the labor unions and many mem-

bers of his own party. He resigned as prime minister in April 2000, after the parties of the governing center-left coalition lost votes in regional elections to the opposition groups led by SILVIO BERLUSCONI. As head of the Democratic Party of the Left and a leader of the opposition, D’Alema continues to work for his brand of social democracy.

Dalla Chiesa, Carlo Alberto (1920–1982) military officer in charge of the fight against political terrorism and the Mafia This general of the CARABINIERI military corps proved himself a man of courage and an efficient organizer in the fight against political TERRORISM (1978–82), following the kidnapping and assassination of ALDO MORO. His next assignment showed the limits of police power in the absence of adequate political cover. In April 1982 Dalla Chiesa accepted the invitation from Prime Minister GIOVANNI SPADOLINI to become prefect of Palermo and take charge of the government’s campaign against the MAFIA. The government, however, did not grant his request for broad police powers throughout Sicily. Dalla Chiesa understood the Mafia as a gigantic business operation with strong political connections. Fighting it required a skillful combination of oldfashioned police methods with the latest tools of electronic surveillance. On September 3, 1982, Dalla Chiesa was gunned down in his car along with his wife and chauffeur. A crime that shocked the nation almost as much as the Moro assassination, the death of Dalla Chiesa energized parliament into passing a series of measures that made “association with the Mafia” a 227

228 Dalmatia

crime, broadened police powers, and led to the arrest of thousands of suspected Mafia members and accomplices. Suspicions that highly placed political figures conspired or colluded in his assassination were rife in the press at the time and continue to this day.

Dalmatia Dalmatia, currently a province of the independent state of Croatia, and formerly part of Yugoslavia, occupies the coast of the Adriatic Sea and its immediate hinterland from the city of Fiume (Rijeka) to the gulf of Kotor. Zara (Zadar) is the capital; other important cities are Fiume, Sebenico (Sibenik), and Dubrovnik. The population is mostly Roman Catholic. Historic ties to Italy date back to the first century B.C. when Dalmatia became a Roman province. It later fell under the rule of the Ostrogoths, the Byzantine Empire, the Ottoman Turks, and Venice. Venetians settled in its coastal cities and islands, fighting off attempts by the Turks to occupy the region. NAPOLEON I forced Venice to surrender Dalmatia to Austria in 1797 by the Treaty of Campoformio, which ended Venetian independence. From 1805 to 1809 it was part of the Napoleonic Kingdom of Italy; it was part of the French Empire from 1809 to 1815, when the Congress of Vienna restored it to Austrian rule. It remained under Austrian rule until the end of WORLD WAR I. The Treaty of Paris awarded most of Dalmatia to the new state of Yugoslavia in spite of the fact that the province had been assigned to Italy by the secret PACT OF LONDON to entice Italy into declaring war on Austria. GABRIELE D’ANNUNZIO took over Fiume illegally in 1919, and the city was assigned to Italy in 1924. The Treaty of Rapallo (1920) gave Italy the city of Zara and the islands of Cres, Losinj, Palagruza, and Lastovo in the upper Adriatic. Italian military forces occupied most of Dalmatia in WORLD WAR II but lost control of it to Germany in 1943 when Italy pulled out of the war. The communist partisans of Marshall Tito took over Dalmatia in 1945 and began to systematically expel its

Italian-speaking population. The population is now overwhelmingly Serbo-Croatian.

D’Annunzio, Gabriele (1863–1938) writer and public figure Born in Pescara to a family of the upper-middle class (his father was a successful merchant prominent in local affairs), D’Annunzio attended the exclusive live-in Cicognini College in Prato, where he spent seven years. His first volume of poems, Primo vere (1889), published while he was a student, announced him as a new and disturbing literary presence. Sensuous and selfindulgent, D’Annunzio’s writings appealed to a generation eager for new sensations. As a journalist, D’Annunzio introduced a large readership to the gossip and scandals of Roman social life, in which he fully participated. The novel Il piacere (Pleasure, 1889) is based on his intimate knowledge of Roman high society. It confirmed D’Annunzio’s reputation as a scandalmonger and womanizer. Andrea Sperelli, the novel’s sensuous and self-indulgent protagonist, can be seen as modeled on the author, who, like his hero, also liked to pose as a Nietzschean superman exempt from the rules of conventional morality. He liked the dramatic gesture. In 1897 D’Annunzio was elected to parliament as a member of the conservative Right, but, bored by parliamentary routine, three years later he defected clamorously to the socialist Left. He was not reelected. A well-publicized affair with the actress ELEONORA DUSE brought him more public attention. In 1911 he left Italy for France to escape his many creditors, who recouped their losses by auctioning off his furniture and collections of artistic and rare objects. In France he wrote poems glorifying the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR. He returned to Italy in May 1915 to campaign for Italian intervention in WORLD WAR I and immediately volunteered for military service. During the war he participated in several wellpublicized exploits, most notably an air raid over Vienna, during which the Italian planes dropped propaganda leaflets over the enemy’s capital. A

Dante Alighieri 229

genuine war hero, he loudly criticized the government’s failure to obtain maximum territorial compensations at the PARIS PEACE CONFERENCE. His reference to Italy’s “mutilated victory” fed the anger of frustrated nationalists. In September 1919 he led a band of armed volunteers who forcibly took over the contested city of FIUME. At the head of the self-proclaimed state, called the Reggenza del Carnaro, he held out in the city against the wishes of the great powers and the Italian government until January 1921. During those 15 months Fiume became a stage for D’Annunzio’s brand of theatrical politics. He assumed the title of Comandante, staged parades and mass rallies, addressed the crowd from his balcony in the presidential palace, invented patriotic slogans and war cries, designed and donned military uniforms for himself and his followers, and threatened to “march on Rome.” When the Italian troops finally evicted him, he retired to private life in a villa overlooking Lake Garda, which he refurbished and named Il Vittoriale. It is not surprising that D’Annunzio was later dubbed the John the Baptist of fascism, but the truth is that his relations with fascism and BENITO MUSSOLINI were often strained. The regime subsidized him generously, partly out of genuine admiration and partly to keep him happy and quiet. The association with the Fascist regime cast a long shadow on D’Annunzio as a literary figure. Dismissed after the war as a bombastic writer with a genius for staying in the public eye, D’Annunzio’s literary reputation is now being reassessed without political partisanship. The picture that emerges is that of a writer of immense talent who in his life and writings reflected the travails, passions, and foibles of Italians before and after WORLD WAR I.

Dante Alighieri (1265–1321) major literary figure and national symbol Dante’s influence is so pervasive that his name must be included in any coverage of Italian culture. Born to a family of the Florentine lower nobility, he was active in the public life of his city

Dante Alighieri in a portrait from the Divine Comedy (Library of Congress)

at a time of intense and perilous factional strife. Caught in the struggle between popes and emperors, he sided with the faction known as the White Guelfs that opposed Pope Boniface VIII. When the Black Guelfs won out, he was banished from the city and his possessions confiscated. He lived the rest of his life in exile, wandering from court to court in central and northern Italy. Literary references to him as the Ghibellin fuggiasco (Wandering Ghibelline), Ghibellines being supporters of the emperors, overlook the fact that he did not support the imperial cause in Florentine politics. But the Ghibelline label does point to his belief that universal empire was the proper mode of political organization for the Christian world. In his view, secular rulers were the rightful holders of political power, and the church was the depository of spiritual power. In

230 Dante Alighieri Society

the RISORGIMENTO, anticlerical patriots overlooked Dante’s preference for a universal mode of political organization (more akin to a united Europe than to one divided into national states), seizing instead on his opposition to the PAPACY, which they regarded as an obstacle to national unification. Dante was thus transformed into a patriotic icon and a forerunner of modern ANTICLERICALISM. Dante also assumed significance as a symbol of Italian nationality because of his literary role in shaping and propagating the use of the Tuscan dialect as the national language. The poetic masterpiece that he composed during his exile, called Commedia by him and The Divine Comedy by later generations, became the holy book of Italian culture, playing a role for educated Italians similar to that of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey for educated Greeks. Its verses are studied for their poetic power and for what they reveal about Dante’s attitude toward the affairs of Italy, its place and mission in the world, and the moral values of Italian culture. In the 19th century, UGO FOSCOLO and GIUSEPPE MAZZINI were instrumental in developing Dante’s image as a forerunner of Italian national identity.

Dante Alighieri Society The poet’s name was claimed by the Dante Alighieri Society, founded in 1889 by RUGGERO BONGHI and others to help Italian emigrants abroad maintain a sense of their Italian identity. Its mission developed into that of promoting the expansion of Italian culture abroad by encouraging the study of the Italian language, funding lectures and libraries, and sponsoring and disseminating publications. It was a private association with close ties to government. Those ties became even closer during the Fascist period when the government used it for outright propaganda purposes. It suffered from the Fascist connection in the postwar years, but gradually regained some of its former vitality as a cultural institution by coordinating its efforts with those of other groups in an area where government

policy has been weak to nonexistent. In 1989, the centenary of its foundation, the Italian state recognized it officially as part of its national commission for the promotion of Italian culture abroad.

Da Ponte, Lorenzo (1749–1838) writer and educator Born Emanuele Conegliano to a Jewish family of Venice, he took the name of Lorenzo Da Ponte when he converted to Christianity in 1763. After a brief stint in a seminary, he launched on an adventurous life marked by scandal. Expelled from Venice in 1782, he found refuge in Vienna, where he served as librettist at the imperial theater from 1783 to 1790. In that capacity he wrote lyrics for several composers, including Antonio Salieri (1750–1825) and Mozart. The libretto for Mozart’s opera Don Giovanni is considered his masterpiece. He resumed a life of wandering after the death of his patron, Emperor JOSEPH II. Settling in London in 1791, he worked again as a librettist, contracted an unhappy marriage, taught Italian, ventured into the bookselling business, went broke, and left for the United States in 1805. After a brief stint as a medicine salesman in Pennsylvania, he settled in New York City, where he earned a living by teaching Italian. Columbia University appointed him professor of Italian language and literature in 1830. He encouraged the performance of Italian opera in the city, creating a taste that has endured. Da Ponte is in many ways typical of 18th-century Italian intellectuals and artists who felt limited in Italy, wandered abroad, and in the process helped to establish an Italian cultural presence in foreign lands.

D’Aragona, Ludovico See SYNDICALISM. DC (Democrazia Cristiana) The initials DC stand for the political party of Christian Democracy that dominated Italian pol-

DC 231

itics from 1945 to the early 1990s. The movement from which the party sprang had its roots in Catholic social thought of the late 19th century. It was an attempt to update Catholic social doctrine in light of the social transformations brought on by the Industrial Revolution, including opposition to the spread of socialism and materialist doctrines. Christian democracy asserted the principle of social solidarity, condemned class warfare, and called on workers and employers to come together in a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation. Its fundamental principles were set out after 1890 in the encyclicals of Pope LEO XIII, the writings of GIUSEPPE TONIOLO, and the political initiatives of ROMOLO MURRI. Strong opposition from elements of the clergy and laity, the conflict of CHURCH AND STATE, and the election of Pope PIUS X hindered the rise of a Christian Democratic movement before WORLD WAR I. Christian Democracy was the ideology of the popular party (PPI) founded in 1919 by the priest LUIGI STURZO. Hostile to FASCISM, the party was dissolved at the demand of Benito Mussolini to improve relations between the CATHOLIC CHURCH and the Italian state. Facing political persecution and deprived of papal support, the PPI dissolved in 1925. ALCIDE DE GASPERI, the PPI’s last secretary, gave the name of Christian Democracy to the party that he organized following the collapse of the Fascist regime in 1943. Its anti-Fascist credentials were strengthened by De Gasperi’s own past and by the party’s participation in the RESISTANCE. Its program called for land reform, an end to state monopolies, modernization of the public administration, and cooperation across class lines. It embraced family values, private property, and social services for the indigent. Unlike other political parties that targeted particular classes or groups, the DC appealed to a broad cross-section of society. It was a Catholic party, but De Gasperi was careful to assert the DC’s lay character and to distance it from the Catholic hierarchy. Nevertheless, the church gave strong support to the party, especially at election time. The DC emerged as the single largest political party in the coun-

try in the elections of June 1946 and gained an absolute majority in the elections of 1948. After that triumph, it was the leading vote-getter but never again a party of the absolute majority. It governed in coalition with other parties out of choice and necessity. The parties that supported the DC were those of the center (PLI, PRI, and PSDI) in the 1950s and the PSI (socialists) in the 1960s after the so-called OPENING TO THE LEFT. Anticommunism was the strongest political card that the DC played for the duration of the cold war, but in the 1970s and 1980s declining voter support and internal party pressures led to the informal understanding with the communists known as the HISTORIC COMPROMISE. It involved sharing power without actually admitting communists into the national government. The result was a critical blurring of ideological distinctions, political disorientation among voters, and the rise of political TERRORISM on the extreme Left and Right. Signs of the DC’s political decline were the appointment of the first non–Christian Democratic prime minister in the person of GIOVANNI SPADOLINI in 1981 and the long government headed by the socialist BETTINO CRAXI in 1983–87. The DC reached a low point in the elections of 1992 when it won only 29 percent of the popular vote. It was still the single largest party, but in the eyes of most voters it was tainted by years of political corruption, government inefficiency, and scandal. The end of the cold war and the MANI PULITE scandal of the early 1990s administered the final blows to the DC. In January 1994 it renamed itself the Italian Popular Party (PPI) in an effort to return to its origins as a party of reform, but attempts to restructure it produced more discordant factions. Some former Christian Democrats joined the Democratic Party of the Left (PDS), others the rightist National Alliance. For all its undeniable inadequacies, the DC presided over a critical period of history when political democracy struck deep roots, the economy prospered, regional imbalances were reduced, schooling became universally accessible, and the depths of deprivation (la miseria) became a thing of the past.

232 De Ambris, Alceste

De Ambris, Alceste (1874–1934) labor organizer and revolutionary syndicalist Born to a middle-class family in the province of Massa Carrara (Tuscany), where there were strong anarchist and socialist influences, De Ambris became politically active at an early age, joined the Socialist Party (PSI) in 1892, organized workers, and wrote for socialist publications. Jailed twice, in 1898 he left Italy for Brazil, where he organized Italian emigrants. Expelled by the Brazilian government in 1903, he returned to Italy, resumed his journalistic and organizational activities first in the town of Savona, then in Parma (1907), where he became secretary of the local chamber of labor. With Parma as his base of operations, he encouraged Italian workers to use the strike as a political weapon and aim at the seizure of power by constant agitation. His tactics were inspired by the ideas of Georges Sorel and REVOLUTIONARY SYNDICALISM. That orientation caused him to break with the PSI and the General Confederation of Labor. In 1908 he led a bitterly contested and ultimately unsuccessful agricultural strike, after which he once again fled to Brazil. Elected to parliament by the workers of Parma, he returned to Italy in 1913 protected by parliamentary immunity. His experiences abroad convinced him that worker solidarity broke down in the face of national differences. He concluded that Italian workers should rely only on themselves. His turning away from internationalism prepared his conversion to a form of nationalist socialism. When WORLD WAR I broke out, he joined BENITO MUSSOLINI in urging Italian intervention. During the war he developed an ideology of national revolution and CORPORATISM that alienated him further from the socialist Left. The Union of Italian Labor (UIL) that he helped found in 1914 later gravitated toward FASCISM. De Ambris supported GABRIELE D’ANNUNZIO’s seizure of FIUME in 1919 and wrote the Carta del Carnaro (Charter of the Carnaro), which outlined a corporatist form of political organization for Fiume that anticipated the corporatism of the Fascist state. But De Ambris disapproved of Mus-

solini’s political tactics and suspected him of seeking an accommodation with conservative interests. He did not therefore support the Fascist seizure of power, left the country for France in 1923, and spoke out against the regime. Regarded with suspicion by anti-Fascist groups, he lived politically isolated. In 1926 the Fascist government stripped De Ambris of his Italian citizenship.

De Amicis, Edmondo (1846–1908) popular writer and patriotic publicist De Amicis entered on a military career at age 19 and served as an infantry officer in the war of 1866. As editor of the review L’Italia Militare, he published sketches of military life, later gathered in the volume La vita militare (1868), that presented service in the army as a school of patriotism. Encouraged by this first success, De Amicis left the army to pursue a career as writer and journalist. He was present at the seizure of Rome in 1870, traveled widely in Europe and the Near East, always putting his impressions in writing with only moderate commercial and literary success. His strength was fictional narrative that conveyed strong moral messages. The book that displays De Amicis at his best is Cuore (1886) where, as the title indicates, he speaks from and to the heart. It is a collection of stories focusing on the lives of ordinary people struggling with hardship and poverty, surviving by courage and hard work, often with the help of better-off compatriots. De Amicis deplored the plight of emigrants, wanted broad access to education, and called on members of the privileged classes to help the less fortunate. His paternalistic message resonated strongly among middle-class Italians, who found in De Amicis a champion of the poor who spoke the reassuring language of social solidarity and did not threaten revolution. Literary critics dismissed him as sentimental and social critics as paternalistic. De Amicis is often referred to as a “rosewater socialist” and the term socialismo deamiciasiano is synonymous in Italy with well-meaning but ineffective social concern.

De Felice, Renzo 233

Cuore was once one of the most widely read books in Italy and is not entirely forgotten even today. Many of De Amicis’s writings have been published in English, including several editions of Cuore: The Heart of a Boy between 1887 and 1986.

De Benedetti, Carlo See OLIVETTI S.P.A.

front charges of profiteering and bad administration under his colonial rule. Soured by Mussolini’s refusal to defend him against his critics, De Bono was further alienated by his aversion to the alliance with Nazi Germany. He played no role in WORLD WAR II, but as a member of the Fascist Grand Council he voted on July 24, 1943, for the motion that called on Mussolini to resign. For that he was considered a traitor to the regime, imprisoned, tried, and executed by diehard Fascists in January 1944.

De Bono, Emilio (1866–1944) military figure, commander of Fascist action squads and militias, chief of police, army commander in the Ethiopian War General De Bono was one of the few high-ranking military officers who openly sided with FASCISM before the party came to power in October 1922. His career before the advent of fascism had been fairly undistinguished. He was made captain in 1897, in the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR he had his first experience of colonial administration, and was promoted to general in 1916. He turned to fascism after being decommissioned in 1920. BENITO MUSSOLINI welcomed him and assigned to him a prominent role as one of four “Quadrumvirs” (commanders) of the march on Rome that brought the Fascists to power. De Bono identified completely with the Fascist regime, serving as chief of police and commander of the Fascist Militia (1922–24), governor of the colony of Tripolitania (1925–28), and minister of colonies (1929–35). Implicated in the coverup of the murder of GIACOMO MATTEOTTI, he had to step down as chief of police in 1924. As minister of colonies he was instrumental in planning for the ETHIOPIAN WAR. Mussolini appointed him military commander in Ethiopia at the start of operations in October 1935, in order to have a Fascist general in charge, but replaced him with General PIETRO BADOGLIO less than two months later to speed up operations. De Bono was promoted to army marshal, but to De Bono’s chagrin Badoglio enjoyed the honors and material rewards of victory. For the remainder of his career an embittered De Bono also had to con-

De Felice, Renzo (1929–1996) historian, biographer of Mussolini, and political critic Perhaps Italy’s most controversial contemporary historian, De Felice left his mark on scholarship and public life mostly with a monumental biography of BENITO MUSSOLINI that took up most of his productive life. He began his teaching career at the University of Salerno in 1968 and later became a tenured professor of contemporary history at the University of Rome. A student of Delio Cantimori with whom he studied at the University of Florence, De Felice followed his mentor’s lead in at least two ways. Intellectually, he pursued Cantimori’s interest in utopian thinkers and social reformers with his early studies of Italian JACOBINS. He followed Cantimori politically by joining the Italian Communist Party (PCI). An activist who believed in taking his beliefs to the people, De Felice was arrested in 1952 for distributing anti-American and antiNATO propaganda. But neither Cantimori nor De Felice could stay with any one movement for very long, and both distanced themselves from the PCI after 1956. For De Felice that also meant distancing himself from Marxist historiography. By the early 1960s his interests had shifted to the 20th century, and particularly to the study of FASCISM, which he pursued for the rest of his life. After his Storia degli ebrei italiani sotto il fascismo (History of Italian Jews under fascism, 1961) came many other works on fascism, including the eight-volume biography of Mussolini (1965–97).

234 De Felice-Giuffrida, Giuseppe

His revisionist view of Mussolini and fascism was controversial from the start. He argued that fascism derived from the ideologies and movements of the Left, that its composite character allowed it to move in different directions, that Mussolini was its central figure because he had political savvy and shrewdness, that his foreign policy operated within a traditional balance-ofpower framework, and that popular consensus, not coercion, sustained the regime. By making Mussolini the key figure and downplaying the role of social and cultural forces, De Felice thus suggested that fascism was a one-time phenomenon not likely to recur. That notion challenged the view favored by the Left that fascism was an ever-present threat and that antifascism was therefore an indispensable ingredient of a democratic society. De Felice went on to question the importance of the RESISTANCE, thus challenging another premise of the Left. De Felice did not set out to rehabilitate fascism, but he did argue that its role had to be assessed without political partisanship. He thus goaded a reluctant public into debating the nature and role of fascism in Italian life. The debate that he sparked continues to reverberate in Italian political life.

De Felice-Giuffrida, Giuseppe See FASCI SICILIANI.

De Gasperi, Alcide (1881–1954) anti-Fascist figure, Christian Democratic leader, and prime minister De Gasperi was Italy’s dominant political figure of the reconstruction period after WORLD WAR II. Born to a lower-middle-class family (his father was a police officer) in a village of the Trentino region that was part of the AUSTRIAN EMPIRE, De Gasperi nurtured a strong sense of Italian cultural identity in that region of mixed German and Italian populations. Equally strong was his identification with the Roman Catholic Church and the progressive political aspirations of Christian Democracy (DC), in which he made his political debut in the late 1890s. From 1900 to

1905 he was simultaneously a student of philology at the University of Vienna and a political activist. His political activities included journalism, organizing Italian workers, and defending Italian cultural identity in the multinational Austrian Empire. De Gasperi, who looked upon his political activities as a religious apostolate, clashed with Italian anticlerical socialists in the Trentino, most notably with CESARE BATTISTI, and BENITO MUSSOLINI when he visited the region. From 1911 to 1918 De Gasperi served in the Austrian parliament, pressing the government for concessions to his Italian-speaking constituents, opening an Italian university in TRIESTE, and banking on the TRIPLE ALLIANCE to protect the interests of the Italian minorities in the Austrian Empire. During the war he followed the lead of Pope BENEDICT XV in urging a peaceful solution to the conflict. De Gasperi entered Italian politics when the Trentino became part of Italy at the end of WORLD WAR I. In 1919 he joined the newly founded Popular Party (PPI) and was elected to the Italian parliament on its ticket in 1921. He was clear about the differences between his party and the Fascists, but favored taking the Fascists into the government in order to avert civil war. He continued to favor collaboration with Mussolini’s government until the elections of 1924, when he campaigned publicly against the Fascists and their allies. He became political secretary of the Popular Party in May 1924. Now a major target of Fascist attacks, De Gasperi resigned his post as party secretary and was evicted from parliament. Jailed for 16 months for attempting to leave the country illegally, he found employment in the Vatican Library for the rest of the Fascist period. De Gasperi resumed political activity in 1942–43 as an organizer of the Christian Democratic Party (DC) that governed Italy for almost half a century after the war. He served as head of his party and as prime minister without interruption from December 1945 until July 1953, guiding the country through the peacemaking process, the adoption of a new constitution, participation in NATO, and taking the first steps

De Lorenzo, Giovanni 235

toward European economic cooperation and political integration. His first governments included Communists and Socialists, but in May 1947 he adopted the four-party politics of cooperation among Christian Democrats, Social Democrats, republicans, and liberals. These centrist coalitions and the subsequent OPENING TO THE LEFT kept Fascists and Communists out of power until the 1990s. In spite of his own definition of Christian Democracy as a party of the center moving gradually toward the Left, De Gasperi favored centrist coalitions and policies. He insisted that the party uphold Christian values, while remaining politically independent of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, hence his commitment to governing with the help of lay parties even when the Christian Democrats had the votes to go it alone. Intimately suspicious of secular values, De Gasperi pursued the ideal of a society based on principles of social solidarity, committed to personal freedoms and private property, and opposed to materialism and class conflict. Shifting political loyalties and party rivalries deprived him of the parliamentary majority that he needed to govern, and he resigned as prime minister in July 1953. Already in poor health when he left office, De Gasperi died in his native Trentino in August 1954.

Del Carretto, Saverio See FRANCIS I. Deledda, Grazia (1871–1936) novelist inspired by the folklore and customs of her native Sardinia Winner of the 1926 Nobel Prize for literature, in her novels and short stories Deledda delved into the popular beliefs, primordial myths, and superstitions of her native Sardinia. Human passions are at the core of her narratives. After her first novel, Fior di Sardegna (Flower of Sardinia, 1892) came 40 more, turned out at regular intervals, including Elias Portòlu (1903), Cenere (Ashes, 1903), L’Edera (Ivy, 1908), Colombe e sparvieri (Doves and hawks, 1912), Marianne Sirca (1915), Il segreto dell’uomo solitario (The secret of a solitary

man, 1921), and Annalena Bilsini (1927). She turned some of her novels into plays that were successful on the stage. Cenere was made into the only film that starred ELEONORA DUSE. Love, betrayal, guilt are the driving forces of Deledda’s characters, with social background serving as backdrop. What emerges from the filter of her imagination is not a realistic picture of life in Sardinia, but rather a parade of psychologically ambiguous characters. Her characters could not exist without the regional setting, but it is the emphasis on the psychology of human passions that gives her work the broad appeal that earned her the Nobel Prize. Several of her novels have been translated into English.

Della Casa, Giovanni (1503–1556) papal diplomat, administrator, and writer Della Casa served as bishop of the southern Italian town of Benevento and as papal nuncio (ambassador) to Venice. An able administrator, he is remembered primarily as a secular writer. He wrote elegant verse, but his name is associated primarily with the famous book of manners, Il Galateo (1558) that was published after his death. It became hugely popular throughout Europe after being translated into English, French, German, Latin, and Spanish. It helped to popularize what was considered appropriate and amiable behavior for gentlemen in the manner of BALDASSARRE CASTIGLIONE’s The Courtier, which it imitated. Della Casa takes his place among RENAISSANCE writers who tried to inculcate gentlemanly habits and manners in the upper reaches of society.

Della Volpe, Galvano See COLLETTI, LUCIO. De Lorenzo, Giovanni (1907–1973) army chief of staff suspected of planning a military coup General De Lorenzo was born in Sicily, studied naval engineering at the University of Genoa, served on the Russian front in WORLD WAR II, and

236 De Mauro, Tullio

was a member of the RESISTANCE. Continuing his military career after the war, he was appointed chief of Italian military intelligence (SIFAR) in 1955 and commander in chief of the CARABINIERI in 1962. As head of SIFAR and as commander of the Carabinieri, he modernized the services; he cooperated with the American CIA to train and equip special forces to deal with political subversion. In 1966 confidential documents leaked to the press revealed that he had compiled personal dossiers on prominent political figures. De Lorenzo, who had been promoted to army chief of staff in 1965, was then accused of having harbored secret designs to take over the government at a moment of political crisis in the summer of 1964, possibly in collusion with President ANTONIO SEGNI. It was never clarified whether this so-called Solo Operation was designed to actually carry out a coup d état or was a precautionary counterinsurgency measure against outside forces. The very existence of the plan alarmed the parties of the Left that saw themselves as its targets. De Lorenzo was promptly relieved of his army command in 1966. Once decommissioned, De Lorenzo was elected to parliament for the Monarchist Party (PNM) and later switched his allegiance to the neo-Fascist Italian Social Movement (MSI). A parliamentary inquest censured his methods but recommended no further action.

De Mauro, Tullio See ITALIAN LANGUAGE. Democratic Party of the Left See PCI; PDS. De Nicola, Enrico (1877–1959) member of parliament and first head of state of the Italian republic De Nicola was a renowned lawyer in his native Naples before turning to politics as a progressive liberal. Elected to parliament in 1909 as a follower of GIOVANNI GIOLITTI, he served as undersecretary of colonies (1912–14) and treasury

(1919), and as president of the chamber of deputies (1920–23). He was reelected to parliament in 1924 on the national ticket that included liberals and Fascists, was made senator in 1929, but abstained from political activity. De Nicola did not actively oppose FASCISM and was later criticized for his passive acceptance of the regime. He returned to politics in 1943–44 as a liberal identified with BENEDETTO CROCE. He played a key role in working out the political compromise that enabled UMBERTO II to replace his father on the throne until the elections of June 1946. After the elections, De Nicola served as the provisional head of state of the Italian republic, and became the first president of the republic when the new CONSTITUTION went into effect on January 1, 1948. LUIGI EINAUDI succeeded him as the first regularly chosen president in May 1948. De Nicola presided over the senate from 1948 to 1953 and over the constitutional (supreme) court from 1956 to 1958. De Nicola was respected as a legal expert and for his personal integrity.

Denina, Carlo (1731–1813) Enlightenment figure, writer, and reformer An important figure in the cultural life of his native Piedmont, this clergyman was inspired by the ideas of the ENLIGHTENMENT. Born to a poor farming family, he was able to complete his university studies thanks to a state scholarship. While teaching in secondary school he published works on church history and the history of literature. His most celebrated work was Delle rivoluzioni d’Italia (On the revolutions of Italy, 1769–72), in which the term revolution refers to cultural changes over the centuries. The focus on Italy encouraged other scholars to look for connections and similarities across the political divides of the peninsula, thus playing a role in the rise of cultural nationalism. The book was also notable for the larger perspective that situated Italian culture in the European context. Appointed to teach Italian and Greek languages at the University of Turin, Denina undertook

Depretis, Agostino 237

studies on the history of the ruling HOUSE OF SAVOY. In Dell’impiego delle persone (On the employment of people) he urged ecclesiastical reforms. His efforts to have the book published without official approval angered the clergy and caused him to be dismissed from his university post (the book was published in 1803). In 1782 he found a warm welcome at the court of Frederick II of Prussia. A history of Piedmont that he wrote during this period was published as Istoria dell’Italia occidentale (A history of western Italy, 1809). In Prussia he also wrote on German history and literature and corresponded with Italian intellectuals. Denina’s stay at Frederick’s court was a moment of intense interaction with the cultural trends of the Enlightenment, which reached Italians in part through Denina’s writings and correspondence. In his last years Denina was employed as librarian at the court of NAPOLEON I.

De Pinedo, Francesco (1890–1933) aviator and national hero This celebrated aviator was born to a patrician family in Naples and served in the ITALIAN-TURKISH WAR as a naval officer. He began to fly during WORLD WAR I. He won international acclaim in 1925 with a flight from Italy to Australia, Japan, and back that covered more than 34,000 miles (55,000 kilometers). A similar exploit took him from Italy to North and South America and back in 1927. These and other flights helped publicize the new Italian air force and the Savoia-Marchetti airplanes that won many international flight records. In 1929 De Pinedo was promoted to general and served as deputy air force chief of staff. A personal rivalry with aviation minister ITALO BALBO, whose handling of air force matters De Pinedo criticized in reports to BENITO MUSSOLINI, put an early end to De Pinedo’s career in the air force in 1933. He sought to revive his fortunes by staging a record long-distance flight from New York to Tokyo, but died in New York when his heavily loaded airplane crashed on takeoff.

Depretis, Agostino (1812–1887) prime minister and dominant political figure Depretis belonged to the generation that fought for Italian independence. Born to a well-to-do family of Piedmontese landowners, Depretis studied law at the University of Pavia. In the 1840s he joined the ranks of republican conspirators who gravitated toward GIUSEPPE MAZZINI. He made his debut in politics when he was elected to the first Piedmontese parliament in June 1848. He retained his seat in the preunification parliament of Piedmont-Sardinia and later the Italian parliament, always known as the “representative from Stradella,” the Piedmontese town with which Depretis’s name was always associated. In the preunification parliament he sat with the democratic faction who regarded Cavour as insufficiently patriotic. After the death of URBANO RATTAZZI in 1873, Depretis became the leader of the LIBERAL LEFT. In that capacity, he served three times as prime minister between 1876 and 1887, a period that is often described as the era of Depretis because of his political dominance. An accomplished politician, Depretis defeated the HISTORICAL RIGHT in parliament and brought in a new generation of representatives, including many from the South. Depretis renounced the republican sentiments of his youth, and worked to limit the prerogatives of the crown and broaden the suffrage. He also promised to repeal the unpopular MACINATO (grist tax), give more power to local administrations, and make elementary schooling compulsory. These and other reforms were slowed and compromised by the difficulties of governing with a divided majority, by inadequate funding, and by the fear that broadening the suffrage would give more leverage to the Catholic Church and its refusal to recognize the Italian state. During his last and longest ministry (1881–87), Depretis orchestrated the repeal of the grist tax, extended the suffrage, and enacted administrative reforms, including the reorganization of the national railroad system. His major achievement in foreign policy was the conclusion of the TRIPLE ALLIANCE with Austria-Hungary and Germany, which

238 De’ Ricci, Scipione

Depretis regarded as compatible with good relations with Great Britain and France. He perfected the practice of TRANSFORMISM, sidestepping dissenters from the Liberal Left and seeking the support of the Historical Right on specific bills. His readiness to take support wherever he found it, manipulation of parliamentary majorities, the use of patronage to sway voters, and other questionable electoral practices, gave Depretis an unsavory reputation. Critics accused him of stifling debate, avoiding questions of principle, and governing by personal rule. A more sympathetic view sees him as adept in the arts of compromise, committed to gradual reform, and able to maintain parliamentary consensus in a difficult political environment.

De’ Ricci, Scipione See RICCI, SCIPIONE DE’. De Ruggiero, Guido (1888–1948) political writer and public figure This distinguished Neapolitan scholar studied law and taught the history of philosophy at the universities of Messina and Rome (1923–25). A political liberal, De Ruggiero viewed LIBERALISM as a gradual process that enfranchised broad segments of the population, promoted involvement in civic affairs, and led toward democracy. In perceiving liberalism as an open road toward democracy, De Ruggiero distanced himself from BENEDETTO CROCE, with whom he was nevertheless close politically and philosophically. De Ruggiero came to liberalism from nationalistic positions that made him favor Italian intervention in WORLD WAR I. The war changed his perspective, drawing him toward the radical liberalism of PIERO GOBETTI. A silent opponent of FASCISM, De Ruggiero continued to live and teach in Italy under the regime. His Storia del liberalismo europeo (The history of European liberalism, 1925) was very influential in guiding a younger generation of intellectuals toward a positive reappraisal of the country’s liberal past. Its reprinting (1941) caused his dismissal from

his university post a year later. A founder of the ACTION PARTY, in 1943 he was appointed rector of the University of Rome by the government of PIETRO BADOGLIO. He also served as minister of education (1944) in the government of IVANOE BONOMI (1944). Other works include a multivolume Storia della filosofia (History of philosophy, 1918–48) and Il ritorno della ragione (The return of reason, 1946).

De Sanctis, Francesco (1817–1883) historian, literary critic, government minister, and public figure A member of the generation that fought for Italian independence, De Sanctis was also a major intellectual figure. His influence was felt through his teaching and his writings as a historian and literary critic. He was born in Avellino, studied privately in Naples, and began to teach in 1839. Radicalized by the influence of philosophical IDEALISM, De Sanctis fought on the barricades in the REVOLUTION of 1848 alongside his students. For that indiscretion he lost his teaching position and was incarcerated. Sentenced for deportation to America (1853), he jumped ship and made his way to Turin and Zurich, where he taught Italian literature (1856–59). He returned to Naples in 1860, was elected to the first Italian parliament, and was active in journalism. As minister of education (1878–79) he upheld the separation of CHURCH AND STATE, insisted on maintaining the lay character of public education, and on combating illiteracy. His political stance was that of a typical 19th-century liberal, but the nature of his intellectual legacy is more complex. He distanced himself from the school of literary criticism that looked for moral lessons in literature. In his two-volume masterpiece, Storia della letteratura italiana (History of Italian literature, 1870–71), also published in English (1931, 1960, 1968), he studied literature historically and approached it as an integral part of the culture of the people. His survey of Italian literature from medieval times to the 19th century derives vitality and validity from the conceptualization of lit-

De’ Stefani, Alberto 239

erature as an expression of national culture. Its combination of rigorous scholarship and imaginative understanding shows De Sanctis poised uneasily between ROMANTICISM and POSITIVISM. His cultural influence and legacy is still the subject of debate.

De Sica, Vittorio (1901–1974) actor, singer, and film director De Sica’s 50-year career as an entertainer began in the 1920s as an actor in musical comedies and vaudeville. De Sica was raised in Naples, worked briefly as an office clerk, turned to the theater, and scored his first big success with the lead part in Gli uomini, che mascalzoni (What rascals men are, 1932), a film directed by Mario Camerini (1895–1981). Success in various sentimental comedies established him as Italy’s most popular actor in films like Il signor Max (Mr. Max, 1939) and Grandi magazzini (Department stores, 1939). These films catered to popular taste by poking gentle fun at the very wealthy and showing ordinary people happily coming to terms with their modest lot in life. De Sica turned to more serious stage roles and film directing in 1940, interpreting stage plays by Noel Coward, Bernard Shaw, and R. B. Sheridan that were often revelations for Italian audiences, and directing films with a more serious social content. In I bambini ci guardano (The children are watching us, 1943), he told the story of a mother who abandons husband and children to live with her lover. The film depicts the complexity of marital relationships, suggests sympathy for the woman’s search for fulfillment outside an unhappy marriage, but also shows the tragic effects of a broken marriage on family life. Critics have seen in the films that De Sica directed between 1940 and 1944 hints of the forthcoming style of NEOREALISM. The neorealist style is evident in films that De Sica codirected with Cesare Zavattini (1902–89). In Sciuscià (Shoeshine, 1946) and Ladri di biciclette (Bicycle thieves, 1948), De Sica gave sympathetic portrayals of human beings traumatized by war, poverty, unemployment, and moral con-

fusion. In these films De Sica was especially sensitive to the plight of children in war-ravaged Italy. Miracolo a Milano (Miracle in Milan, 1950) is a fairy tale excursion into the lives of marginal people who end their search for happiness by flying away from this world on broomsticks. Umberto D (1952), perhaps the most sophisticated and complex of De Sica’s films, explores the not-always-attractive personality of a retired civil servant who reacts against the indignities and hardships of retirement by closing in on himself and contemplating suicide. De Sica continued to act and direct in both light and serious veins until 1970, displaying great acting versatility and ability as a storyteller.

De’ Stefani, Alberto (1879–1969) economist and Fascist political figure Born in Verona, De’ Stefani was a laissez-faire economist who acquired a solid academic reputation teaching and writing on quantitative economics and statistics before turning his attention to politics after WORLD WAR I. He favored Italian intervention in the war and volunteered for military service. He joined the Fascist Party and was elected to parliament in 1921. A leader of Fascist action squads, he engaged in several large-scale actions, including the occupation of the city of Bolzano by the Fascists at the beginning of October 1922. As the first Fascist minister of finances (1922–25), De’ Stefani oversaw a partial dismantling of government regulatory agencies, reduced tariffs and taxes on business, cut government expenses, balanced the budget, pursued a deflationary policy, and strengthened the CURRENCY. Domestic producers who could not compete resisted his free-trade policies, and investors were angered by his attempts to curb stock market speculations. In July 1925 BENITO MUSSOLINI replaced De’ Stefani with GIUSEPPE VOLPI as minister of finances. Mussolini later put De’ Stefani in charge of the regime’s program of extensive LAND RECLAMATION projects and used him in various advisory capacities. As a member of the Fascist Grand Council he voted to oust

240 Destra Storica

Mussolini on July 25, 1943. A political crimes tribunal dismissed charges against him after the war. Economic liberalism and illiberal politics coexisted uneasily in De’ Stefani.

joined the neo-Fascist ITALIAN SOCIAL MOVEMENT. His clean-shaven head and handlebar mustache gave him a distinctive look in harmony with his truculent character.

Destra Storica See HISTORICAL RIGHT.

Italy: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present - PDF Free Download (2024)