Vincenzo Gioberti

During the era of the unification of Italy, few people were so well known as Vincenzo Gioberti. Today, however, he is seldom remembered at all despite the fact that his writings were some of the most widely read in his own time. He had an exalted view of religion yet was often condemned by the religious authorities of the day. He was a member of revolutionary organizations but was a zealous monarchist. The plan he put forward for the unification of the Italian people, based on cooperation between Turin and Rome, was accepted by both the Pope and the King of Piedmont-Sardinia. The problem was that they were never able to accept it at the same time. When one embraced it, the other rejected it and when the other finally came around to accepting it as well the one had passed the point of such an agreement. It must have been maddeningly frustrating for Gioberti but he was a man who often found himself at odds with those who championed the most; his Church and his monarch. However, had his ideas been accepted, there is no doubt that the unification and early history of the united Italy would have been considerably different.

Vincenzo Gioberti was born on April 5, 1801 in Turin, in the Kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia and early in life he decided on a religious career. He trained for the priesthood with the fathers of the Oratory and in 1825 was ordained priest. As a young priest he was influenced by the writings of the revolutionary republican Giuseppe Mazzini. He rejected his anti-clericalism but embraced the idea of Italian unity wholeheartedly. While others in the revolutionary camp looked to Freemasonry and the Carbonari to create a “new religious synthesis” in Italy, Gioberti believed that it was the Catholic Church that was the pride and glory of Italy and that it was the Churchy, under the leadership of the Papacy, that was uniquely qualified to lead the Italian people to national unity, renewed vitality and renewed greatness. Since the fall of Imperial Rome it had, after all, been the great Pontiffs of the Italian Renaissance who had come the closest to forging a pan-Italian political unity, which was also a time of artistic and scientific flowering. As Gioberti saw it, the Church was uniquely qualified to bring about such a rejuvenation against and that the Papacy was the one focus of unity that everyone had in common and which could bring together all Italians in a common cause.

This was music to the ears of the Piedmontese monarch King Carlo Alberto and he made Gioberti his court chaplain. Many, however, opposed Gioberti from the start because of the influence he had with the King. Many at court opposed his political views, fearing any change to the status quo. The fact that Gioberti was known as an Italian nationalist and an acquaintance of Mazzini, well known in the Young Italy movement, caused many to consider him dangerous. He himself had done nothing wrong and he had not a disloyal bone in his body but fears were running high and simply being on speaking terms with members of the group that was plotting republican revolution in Piedmont and the other Italian states was enough to bring the police down on him. Gioberti was also a prolific writer and philosopher whose ideas sometimes got him into trouble. He was critical of Pope Gregory XVI and the Jesuits and his speculations caused some in the Church to doubt his orthodoxy and in response to all this pressure in 1833 he resigned from his post at court. Nonetheless, his enemies pounced and he was arrested for conspiracy, imprisoned for a short time and then banished without ever having been given a trial. He went to Paris but spent most of his time in Brussels where he published his famous work ‘The Moral and Civil Primacy of the Italians’ which was to become so widely read in 1843.

It was primarily this work by which Gioberti made the cause of Italian unification something that respectable, middle class people could get behind rather than being the exclusive domain of anti-clerical republicans and bomb-throwing revolutionaries. He recounted the glories of the civilization of the Italian people and in the cultural, non-political sphere, it was certainly the Papacy that was the most brilliant jewel of all. Gioberti envisioned a coming together of Rome and Turin, the spiritual greatness of the Holy See with the secular greatness of the Royal House of Savoy. He proposed that the princes of Italy grant representative government on their own local levels with consultative assemblies to advise but not govern the states. The states of Italy should then bind themselves together in a federation under the supra-national leadership of the Pope in order to have a common military, foreign policy, overseas colonies and a customs union while each state retained its own monarchy and unique local traditions. He rejected the republican nationalism of Mazzini which sought to weld all Italians from Turin to Naples into a single, uniform entity in favor of a more federal model of “consultative monarchies” which would be somewhat similar to what the German states eventually achieved several decades later.

Given how Italian history played out subsequently, many historians have dismissed the ideas of Gioberti as naively unrealistic. Yet, it was actually his vision which had the most history behind it. The last era of real Italian greatness had been the Renaissance period and during that time the Italian states were frequently united in a common cause by the leadership of the Pope. The most well known example was probably that of Pope Julius II who led Papal troops in person along with the other allied states to drive the “barbarians” out of Italy. However, even going back to the Middle Ages the Popes frequently arranged alliances of the Italian states toward a common goal or against a common threat. All Gioberti was really proposing was a more formalized and permanent version of what had existed at many points in the past throughout the course of Italian history. In that way, his vision was perhaps the most realistic of all. Gioberti embraced the cause of the Risorgimento whole-heartedly and he firmly believed that the Risorgimento could only truly flourish within the embrace of the Church. Second to the Papacy, his greatest loyalty and praise was reserved for his native ruler; the King of Piedmont-Sardinia who alone had the political and military muscle to see this plan brought to fruition. The Pope could make unity a fact and the Savoy could defend it.

Many people were won over by this argument, among them the future Pope Pius IX who read the book in which it was put forward in 1845. The next year, as Pope, it seemed to many that Pius IX was going perfectly step by step to put the vision of Gioberti into effect. He spoke of the Italian nation, authorized a consultative assembly for the Papal States and began encouraging greater unity and cooperation among the Italian princes. People across the peninsula cheered these moves and it seemed that Gioberti had truly shown the way for the best possible sort of unification. However, Gioberti had said that all depended on the alliance of Rome and Turin and it frustratingly seemed that when Turin favored his philosophy, Rome adamantly opposed it only to see Rome embrace the idea after Turin had discarded it. In 1848 Gioberti returned to his homeland and was warmly welcomed. King Carlo Alberto offered him a seat in the Piedmontese senate but, feeling unworthy, Gioberti turned it down. Still, he was elected to represent his home district in the Chamber of Deputies and eventually became Prime Minister of Piedmont-Sardinia. Finally in a position to put his ideas into effect, Gioberti immediately began trying to reconcile the opposing sides of the revolution, sending an envoy to the Pope, who had fled to Gaeta, with orders that he talk to the leaders of the Roman Republic along the way.

Needless to say, Mazzini refused to be convinced. He had, in fact, promoted Gioberti to write his famous “Primacy” by urging him to a write a ’catechism for the Risorgimento’ but Mazzini was totally opposed to what Gioberti reduced, despising what he called the “ultra-Romanism” of it as well as the glowing tributes to King Carlo Alberto. Gioberti’s ambassador received no warm welcome in Gaeta either with the Pope at first refusing to meet with the man at all. Since Gioberti had dared to even speak with the revolutionaries, the Pope refused to give him any hearing. Many have since said that if only the moderate Pellegrino Rossi (the Minister of Justice and the Interior of the Papal States) had not been assassinated and still close to Pius IX, everything might have turned out differently. However, from that point on the Pope adopted a different political attitude and there would be no movement toward a federation of monarchies as a method of achieving Italian unity, only the single monarchy or the republic.

Gioberti left office not long after the accession of King Vittorio Emanuele II and after disagreements with the government he left politics. He was sent on a diplomatic mission to Paris and remained there for the rest of his life, refusing a government pension or any religious assistance. He died of an apoplexy on October 26, 1852.



Augustus Caesar - The First Emperor

While Julius Caesar had laid the foundation for the eclipse of the Roman Republic by the Roman Empire it was his nephew, adopted son and heir, Augustus Caesar, who oversaw the transition and made it a success. It was Augustus who managed to get the ardent Roman republicans on the side of an imperial monarchy and embrace it whole-heartedly. It was Augustus who, as the saying went, ‘found Rome brick and left it marble’ and it was Augustus Caesar who established the government framework for the Roman Empire that allowed it to continue for centuries, through the reigns of good and bad emperors alike, and rise to dominate the known world. He was, in every way, a colossal figure in European, western and world history.

He was born Gaius Octavius (aka Octavian) in Rome on September 23, 63 BC. His father had been a senator but died when he was only four. It was through his mother that his most prestigious family ties came as she was the daughter of Julius Caesar’s daughter Julia. When Julius Caesar adopted him as his heir on May 8, 44 BC he took the name Gaius Julius Caesar. He fought with his uncle in Spain and was in Albania preparing to lead the campaign against the Parthians when he learned that Caesar had been assassinated. He returned to Rome and began building his political power base, supported by senators who were fearful of Marc Antony in particular. In a political alliance Antony married Octavian’s sister and the prestige of the young man was increased further when the Roman senate declared Caesar a god in 42 BC.

Nonetheless, Octavian (now known officially as Caesar) broke with Antony after his marriage with Queen Cleopatra of Egypt. This made Antony unpopular in Rome and Octavian took advantage of this to gain public support for moving against Antony, a conflict he won at the pivotal battle of Actium in 31 BC. This left Octavian as the most powerful figure in the Roman world but he had to move carefully to establish the imperial system without offending the republican sensibilities of the Romans, especially the Roman elite. He declared that he was restoring the republic and handed power back to the senate which promptly gave most of it back again in act of political theatre. He was elected consul every year and was given the name “Augustus”, meaning “the Exalted”. He did away with nothing of the republican system but consolidated the powers held previously by numerous individuals into his own hands; thus becoming the first Roman Emperor.

Later, a second settlement brought more regularity and permanence to his position, making Augustus effectively a perpetual consul. His preferred title was “Princeps” or ‘First Citizen’ and although he held ultimate power he still treated the senate with respect. He tried to maintain a feeling of things going back to normal while ushering in a new era with extensive building programs including a number of temples as Augustus was very pious and through his own example and legislation he encouraged an emphasis on religion and a return to traditional Roman family values. These changes, along with public games and an attitude of openness and tolerance of criticism made him a very popular monarch. However, in his private life he was not free of all scandal. He liked to gamble and had a number of mistresses but his biggest embarrassment was his daughter who he finally had exiled because of her debauched behavior.

Emperor Augustus was no great scholar but he was a man of common sense and some literary talent. In the same way he was no military genius but presided over some great victories because he recognized this fact and was content to leave military affairs in the hands of the professionals. He led one campaign in Egypt but generally left the strategy and tactics to others. Still, his reign was an era of great successes for the Roman Empire including the conquest of Egypt, the Alpine frontier and the northern Balkans. His most ambitious military effort was a plan to conquer Germany. His stepson Drusus was put in command but upon his death the burden fell on another stepson (and future successor) Tiberius. The effort to conquer Germany ended in epic disaster however when 3 legions under Quintilius Varus were wiped out at the battle of the Teutoburg Forest in 9 AD. Emperor Augustus mourned long and hard over this disaster and further plans for expansion were shelved and he even left instructions to his heir Tiberius to do the same and be content with the size of the Roman Empire as it was.

So, all in all, Emperor Augustus had been extremely successful. He had ended the civil wars and fierce partisanship of the late republic, accomplished the peaceful transition from republic to empire, restored and beautified Rome itself, set a new public tone, expanded and defended the empire and kept everyone on side by allowing the retention and maintaining at least outward respect for the republican traditions of Rome. Now, because of this last fact, and because Rome remained, at least on paper, a “republic” throughout the imperial period some have asked if not all the past centuries of the reading of history have been wrong and might Rome not have ever been a monarchy at all? I would find such an argument absurd, both based on the facts and because of my own attachment to the Roman Empire. It is not something I wish to surrender to republicans nor would any republicans I have ever met wish to accept it either. Perhaps the key element though that proves Rome did become a monarchy, and a monarchy of the sort most of us today would be familiar with, is the fact that a hereditary succession was established.

Part of what made Augustus so accepted as the natural leader of Rome was his status as the great-nephew and adopted son of Julius Caesar. In the same way his family was viewed very much at the time as the ‘Imperial Family’. It was important to Augustus that the succession continue in his family; the Julian dynasty. However, he ran into problems in this area because he never had a male heir of his own. Therefore he was forced to turn to the husbands and children of his controversial daughter Julia. Her husband Marcellus was considered but such talk ended with his death. Therefore Augustus arranged a marriage between Julia and his most trusted lieutenant Agrippa. Their union produced two sons; Gaius and Lucius, whom Augustus adopted as his own but with Agrippa to be his heir in their minority. Yet, Agrippa died in 12 BC, leaving no one to look after the tots that Augustus trusted so he was forced to turn to the sons of his wife Livia by a previous marriage; the aforementioned Drusus and Tiberius. He had Tiberius marry Julia but he was still reluctant to embrace the future going to the Claudian dynasty and continued to indulge his grandsons Gaius and Lucius. However, when they both predeceased him Tiberius was left as the only viable choice.

Augustus began to slow down as his years caught up with him and his health began to decline. He died at Nola on August 19, 14 AD just a month before his 76th birthday. His body was taken back to Rome and his ashes placed in his magnificent imperial Mausoleum. As the first Roman Emperor he set the standard by which subsequent monarchs would be judged and it was a high standard. He was an astute statesman, moderate, tolerant, careful and yet adept at acting at crucial times to turn situations to his advantage. He successfully made the Roman Republic the Roman Empire peacefully and successfully by establishing the monarchy slowly, step by step over a period of time. At the time of his death his full name and titles were, “Imperator (Emperor) Caesar Divi Filius (son of a god) Augustus, Pontifex Maximus, Consul XIII, Imperator XXI, Potestatis XXXVII, Pater Patriae (Father of the Country). He had known victory and some defeats but by any standard he left Rome stronger, more beautiful, more secure, more prosperous and with a more stable foundation for the future than he found it. The month of August was named in his honor and he was deified by the senate upon his death.

Julius Caesar - The Threat of a Monarch

When speaking of the great and glorious Roman Empire there is no better place to start than with Julius Caesar. He was, as most know, never formally the “Emperor of Rome”, Augustus being the first Roman Emperor, but there is no doubt that he was the ‘founder of the feast’ so to speak. None of it would have happened without him, Augustus gained his position due to being the heir of Caesar and Caesar himself occupied much the same position only in a less formalized way. He laid the foundation and it was from him that the subsequent monarchs, of the Julio-Claudian dynasty and beyond, drew their ancestral legitimacy and inspiration. Julius Caesar is known as one of the great conquerors of history, one of the commanding, controversial “strong men” and also as an example, in a way, of republican extremism. Several times offered the crown of monarchial power, he declined it. Yet, he was assassinated out of fear that he would establish a monarchy by people who feared his power, his genius and his popularity.

Gaius Julius Caesar was born on July 13, 100 BC. Born into a patrician family he was also born into the intrigues and numerous civil wars that were overwhelming the late Roman Republic. The Social War, the invasions of Mithridates and the ongoing feud between the populares and optimates. This had a direct impact on Caesar as his uncle Marius (a popularis) fought a violent feud with his old protégé Sulla (an optimas). When Julius Caesar became head of his family at the age of 16 in 85 BC his family was targeted by Sulla and it was only through the influence of his mother’s relatives that he survived. He took refuge in the army where he began to gain a prestigious reputation which, not unusually, followed him into the political sphere as well. In time he was able to defy the regime of Sulla in certain symbolic ways while increasing his own power and influence.

Caesar held a number of offices and also began to gain more political enemies. An illustrative case came in 63 BC when he was accused of plotting against the republic. He was cleared of the charges but removed as praetor the following year over a piece of legislation but was reinstated when the people rose up in his favor. Regimes in decline (like the Roman Republic) often punish success and fear popularity (the Roman Empire would do the same in its final days) and Caesar had already demonstrated both attributes. This only increased following a successful military campaign in the Iberian Peninsula after which Caesar declined the honor of a triumph in order to continue his political career.

The result was the (informal) First Triumvirate of Caesar, Pompey and Crassus. Early on his political enemies attempted to limit his power as much as possible but they were unsuccessful and when his term ended Caesar went on to gain ever more prestige and popularity by waging, and writing about, a campaign of conquest in Gaul, fighting and subduing Gallic tribes, Spanish forces, Belgian forces and even raiding Britain. In his absence, in 50 BC, Pompey tried to thwart Caesar by passing laws aimed at him against standing for election in absentia which had always been allowed before. Ultimately, Caesar was forced to choose between losing his power in yet another coup or (as his old family foe Sulla had previously done) marching on Rome itself which was sure to spark civil war. As we all know Caesar decided to march on Rome and crossed the Rubicon famously saying, “the die is now cast”.

With only the XIII Legion Caesar was greatly outnumbered by Pompey but he had no desire to fight the famed conqueror of most of Western Europe and he fled. Leaving Lepidus and Marc Antony in charge in Rome, Caesar pursued Pompey all the way to Alexandria, Egypt where Pompey was killed by a Roman in the employ of King Ptolemy XIII. It was during the fighting and politicking in Egypt that Caesar famously fell victim to the charms of Queen Cleopatra. He installed her as the ruler of Egypt and the two were even married in the Egyptian religion (which had no validity in Rome) and the ambitious Cleopatra dreamed that her and Caesar would conquer the world and rule as divine monarchs in eastern style. How real these aspirations were and whether Caesar shared them is a matter of speculation but he did go on to defeat the remnants of Pompey’s forces and was showered with honors in Rome.

By that point, the success and popularity of Caesar meant that his enemies, though few, were prepared to go to even greater extremes to stop him, even if it meant assassination. These enemies, about 40 in all, were all senators and more than anything else they feared the establishment of a monarchy which would be a threat to them and possibly mean the death of the politician-class. Caesar had already been declared “Father of the Country”, Supreme Pontiff, Emperor (Imperator -a military title) and finally Dictator for life. All that was left was the title of King and given that Caesar had earlier adopted his nephew Octavian as his son and heir (to be replaced by Brutus -one of the plotters- if Octavian predeceased him) they were terrified that an imperial dynasty was being established and no matter how Caesar protested against the many honors bestowed on him or insisted he desired no crown, their fears were not allayed.

So it was that, on the Ides of March, 44 BC, Caesar was attacked at the portico of the Theatre of Pompey and stabbed 23 times. It is not known that his last words were, “And you too Brutus?” but according to at least one source he may have said something equivalent, shocked that the man he had befriended and benefited would betray him. Thus ended the life of Julius Caesar, hailed by many then and since as one of the greatest men to ever live. The assassins claimed to be acting on behalf of the people but the people were horrified and outraged by the murder and quickly turned on the plotters who had to flee for their lives. We all know the result. The Roman Republic fought one last civil war which ended in Octavian becoming the sole ruler of Rome, voted the title of Augustus (the Exalted) and thus the first Roman Emperor. In 42 BC the Senate voted to deify the fallen hero as ‘the Divine Julius’, which gave his heir Octavian the title of “son of the divine Caesar”.

It is difficult to summarize the life and legacy of so historically large a figure as Julius Caesar. He was immensely successful, immensely popular, a man of great ambition, great vision, great strength and determination. He was neither a republican nor was he ever actually a monarch. Yet, it can perhaps be said in summation of Julius Caesar that, intentionally or not, his life was the death of the decaying Roman Republic and his death was the birth of the Roman Empire that rose up, in Phoenix fashion, from the ashes of his funeral pyre to succeed and surpass what had come before it and it would be the heirs and successors of Julius Caesar who would dominate the known world as the Emperors of Rome.

Emperor Romulus Augustulus

The Roman Empire was an institution so influential and truly historical that, in many ways, the world refused to let it die. The Eastern Roman Empire lingered on until the fall of Constantinople in the 15th Century under Emperor Constantine XI while in the west, the Roman Empire was restored in 800 AD as the Holy Roman Empire which survived until the 19th Century when it was dissolved by Emperor Francis II in 1802 under pressure from Napoleon Bonaparte. However, the one area which most fascinates is the old Western Roman Empire which ended, rather ingloriously, with the overthrow of the young Emperor Romulus Augustulus in 476 AD. His reign was short, almost insignificant in perspective, but also extremely interesting.

It is one of the strange twists of history that the last Emperor of Rome was also the son of a man who once served the single greatest threat the Roman Empire had ever faced, namely; Attila the Hun. Known as "the Scourge of God", Attila's right hand man during his invasions was a man named Orestes. It was Orestes who later became a Roman general himself, though by this time, the once mighty Western Roman Empire had been reduced to most of the Italian peninsula and a small holding in the south of Gaul. Ruling at this time was the Emperor Julius Nepos, appointed in 474 by the Emperors of the East, Leo and Zeno, though he himself was not very strong and it was Nepos who appointed Orestes to the post of Patrician and Master of Soldiers for the Western Empire.

Obviously, this was not a wise decision on the part of Nepos as when the Emperor ordered the new Patrician to march against Gaul, the ambitious Orestes immediately marched into Ravenna on August 28, 475, forced Nepos to flee to Dalmatia, and made his son Romulus Emperor two months later on October 31. The new monarch was probably around 10 to 14-years-old and would not have been able to count on significant international recognition were it not for the fact that the Emperor Leo of the East, who had appointed Julius Nepos, had died the previous year. Because of his youth, the new Emperor was nicknamed "Agustulus" or "the little Augustus" by those around him. The real power continued to be with his father Orestes who effectively ran the empire, or what was left of it, in the name of his son.

Orestes attended to diplomatic efforts first, in actions that in hindsight seems quite a bit like obsessing over details in the face of disaster. He secured recognition for Emperor Romulus from the Eastern Empire and negotiated peace treaties with the German princes ruling in Spain, Africa and Gaul. While this ensured peace for a few years, at least from these individuals, the throne of Romulus was far from secure and such diplomatic efforts amounted to little more than making beds in a burning house.

During this era, the decay of the once mighty Roman Empire was in its final stages, and a clear indication of the depths to which Rome had fallen is how few Romans there were who could actually bestir themselves to fight for the Empire. The Roman military now consisted of barbarians of various tribes, acting as mercenaries, who had no real loyalty to Rome or the young Emperor Romulus but who expected to be paid. These men, fierce, brutal and increasingly exasperated, were Orestes' biggest problem. Gold coins were struck and distributed in Rome, Milan and Ravenna bearing the image of Romulus Augustulus but these few tokens were nothing compared to what the barbarian mercenaries were demanding.

In 476, when Orestes to give land to the assorted Heruls, Scirians and Torcilingi who were demanded compensation for their service, they dropped all semblance of loyalty to the young Emperor Romulus and turned instead to the German chieftain Odoacer. Odoacer, himself a "barbarian" of mixed Scirian and Hunnish ancestry, was somewhat more shrewd and promised the disgruntled soldiers all that they had been denied by Orestes if they would support his own ambition to become king. Seeing the opportunity for something as better than a certainty of nothing, they made an official agreement with Odoacer on August 23, 476 and immediately turned to attack Orestes, hardly bothering at all about his son who actually sat on the imperial throne.

Orestes came out to meet them but was forced to retreat to Pavia, which soon fell to Odoacer. The barbarians closed in on Orestes near Piacenza and on August 28, captured and beheaded him. With that victory, the power behind the throne was gone, and in effect, the campaign was all but over. Odoacer moved on to Ravenna where he killed the Emperor's uncle, Paulus in late August or early September. Once the city was taken, Odoacer turned his attention to the nominal ruler, Emperor Romulus Augustulus. Sources differ over how Odoacer reacted to the boy. Some imply that he was harshly removed and banished, barely escaping with his life. Others say that the chieftain took a liking to the hapless, young monarch. According to one source, because of his youth and handsome appearance he decided to depose Romulus rather than execute him and then sent the former emperor into exile in Campania with his family where he paid him an annual pension of 6,000 solidi. However, Odoacer also forced Romulus to formally abdicate his position, sending a "letter of resignation" to Emperor Zeno of the Eastern Empire, effectively recognizing Constantinople as the one and only capital of the Empire.

If true, this may have been due to the fact that the Emperor Julius Nepos in Dalmatia, who still considered himself the true Western Emperor in exile, was plotting to regain his throne in Italy. In fact, the message from Odoacer seeking recognition of his claim to be King of Italy arrived in Constantinople on the very same day as a message from Emperor Nepos seeking Byzantine money and troops to help in reclaiming his lost dominions. Not wishing to further endanger the shaky imperial hierarchy, Emperor Zeno decided to back the man his predecessors had placed on the throne and advised the envoys from Odoacer to deal with Nepos as the Western Emperor and seek his rank of Patrician from him before Zeno would confirm it.

Of course, Nepos was never able to retake his throne and the Western Roman Empire formally came to an end after the ten month reign of Romulus Augustulus. By then, nothing remained with Odoacer in command of Italy and the few holdings in Gaul rapidly taken in by the Visigoths. In point of fact though, the boy best known as "the last Roman Emperor" might not have been so were it not for the attraction of his name, recalling the legendary co-founder of Rome, allowing for a nice illustration of the Roman civilization coming full circle from one Romulus to another. In actuality, Emperor Romulus was the pawn of his father and nothing more, a usurper who had taken the throne from the legitimate Emperor Nepos who continued to claim Italy from his base in Dalmatia for the rest of his life. Little is known of the young emperor's life in exile. He sent the imperial regalia to Emperor Zeno, who recognized Odoacer as King of Italy, but it seems that he continued to be at least somewhat active, founding the monastery at Lucullanum with the support of his very religious mother.

Birthday of Queen Marie-Jose

It was on this day in 1906 that Her Majesty Queen Marie-Jose, princess of Belgium, consort to His Majesty King Umberto II and beloved last Queen of Italy was born in Ostend in the Kingdom of Belgium. She married the Prince of Piedmont on January 8, 1930 and when he succeeded to the throne became Queen of Italy on May 9, 1946. Her reign was all too short and it was a great opportunity lost for the country. She was a woman of great intelligence, sound judgment, sincere faith, simple tastes, delicate beauty and kind heart. She had all of the qualities to make for an ideal queen-consort including a sense of duty that was never shaken, even during the times of greatest trial and harship. It is so sad that she was never given the opportunity to prove to Italy and the world how great she could have been. She was a dutiful wife, an attentive mother and a friend to all those who suffered. Her compassion was boundless and her sense of right and wrong was firm and unbending. Even in exile she continued to enrich the lives of many people before her sad passing on January 27, 2001. May she never be forgotten.

Italian Confederate General William B. Taliaferro

In the United States of the 1860’s the Italian immigrant and Italian-American population was overwhelmingly concentrated in the north, due to port cities like New York and Boston being the place most immigrants flocked to. This was due to the ethnic diversity that already existed in these areas as well as the availability of jobs for unskilled laborers in the factories and shops of the north. In contrast, the slave-holding southern states had little need for cheap immigrant labor. When the American Civil War broke out most Italian immigrants and Italian-Americans were in the north and fought for the United States. However, there were also Italians, mostly in the city of New Orleans, Louisiana (the biggest southern port city) which formed the Garibaldi Legion in the Confederate States Army. There were also at least a few long established Italian-American families in the Old South and one of these was the Taliaferro family which was to produce a prominent Confederate general in the “War Between the States”.

His name was William Booth Taliaferro, a native of Gloucester County, Virginia. He had English and Italian ancestors (from Venice) and the presence of the Taliaferro family in Virginia went back to the Seventeenth century. He was born in 1822 and was part of the southern “aristocracy”. His uncle was James A. Seddon, a prominent congressman who would go on to become Secretary of War for the Confederate States of America. William B. Taliaferro had the very best upbringing, attending Harvard University in the north and William and Mary College in the south, graduating in 1841. He volunteered for the U.S. Army during the war with Mexico and served in the infantry, gaining a respectable reputation as a soldier. After coming home he was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates and in 1856 campaigned for the presidency of James Buchanan. Still, he did not neglect his military duties and was a commander in the Virginia militia, taking command of the Harpers Ferry region after the bloody raid on the arsenal there by John Brown and his radical abolitionists.

When Virginia seceded from the Union in 1861 Taliaferro was given command of the 23^rd Virginia Infantry with the rank of colonel. In the opening clashes with Union troops he earned praise and a promotion to brigadier general. He aided in the southern victory at the battle of Greenbrier River in 1861 and by 1862 had been promoted to command a division in the army corps of the famous General “Stonewall” Jackson. In this unit he was part of a winning team and one of the most legendary fighting forces in the Confederacy. General Taliaferro was a brave man who led from the front, a fact which almost cost him his life at the Second Battle of Manassas Junction where he was badly wounded. However, he could not be kept from the fighting for long and was back with Jackson in time for the Battle of Fredericksburg, one of the greatest Confederate victories of the war. Jackson and Taliaferro did not always get along. Taliaferro often felt that the famous general was too harsh toward the soldiers and his subordinates and Jackson considered Taliaferro too proud. Yet, Jackson respected Taliaferro’s abilities and knew he could be trusted with important commands.

When it came to his own men, General Taliaferro was not always beloved by all of his soldiers. He was a strict commander who expected perfect discipline and some complained that he was too cold and haughty. However, as long as a general can win battles, most troops would overlook any flaws. And that, General Taliaferro could do. After the battle of Fredericksburg he was transferred to Georgia to command the District of Savannah and was highly praised for repulsing a major attack on Morris Island outside Charleston, South Carolina at Battery Wagner in 1863. Despite being outnumbered nearly 5 to 1 his men held their ground and inflicted devastating losses on the Union forces. The next year, in 1864, he was given command of the East Florida District and was just in time to face another Union invasion force. The result was the Battle of Olustee in northern Florida which was another decisive victory for Taliaferro and the Confederates.

In 1865 Taliaferro was surrendered with the army of General Joseph E. Johnston in North Carolina and returned to his home in Virginia. After the war he continued his distinguished career in civilian life, being elected against to the House of Delegates. He was later elected to a judgeship and served on the board of William and Mary College and the famous Virginia Military Institute. He died at his home at the age of 75 on February 27, 1898 probably the most prominent Italian-American in the Confederate Army.

The Italian Who Saved Austria

It was on this day in 1664 that the decisive battle of Saint Gotthard was fought between the Turkish Ottoman Empire and the allies of the League of the Rhine, including forces from France, the Netherlands and the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. The primary allied commander was Raimondo, Count of Montecucculi from the Duchy of Modena. He had previously served the Duke of Modena against Pope Urban VIII before fighting the French, the Swedes and in defense of Hungary against the ruler of Transylvania. During his later career he would also defeat in battle the brilliant French commander the Vicomte de Turenne and Louis II, the "Great Conde". However it was at the battle of St. Gotthard that he defeated the forces of the Ottoman Empire and saved Austria from a Turkish invasion. The allied forces could likely have followed up the victory with the liberation of Hungary but the Emperor held them back, fearful of a Hungarian rebellion. However, his victory over the Turks at St Gotthard was so complete that it forced the Ottoman Sultan to come to terms with the Emperor and established peace between the two great powers for the next twenty years.