CARBONARI. - A secret political and pseudo-religious society that emerged at the beginning of the 19th century and spread widely in Italy, exerting considerable influence. Like Freemasonry, it surrounded itself with remote and legendary origins, but it is certain that it did not arise before the early years of that century, or at most at the end of the previous one; precisely when, how, and where it originated is a matter of varied opinions and hypotheses. Some trace its descent from Neapolitan Freemasonry or other kindred sects that, under French domination, were transformed into clubs of innovators and intellectuals; others from English Freemasonry, which aimed to create obstacles to Napoleon; still others from the legitimist reaction of 1799, in league with old Jacobins and English agents opposed to the policies of the First Consul. It was said to have been created as a substitute for Freemasonry, which was slavishly subservient to France. Now, following the masterly studies of Martin Saint-Léon on the *compagnonnage* in France, the most accredited opinion holds that it derived from one of these associations that flourished in Franche-Comté in the second half of the 18th century, under the name *charbonnerie*, with rites, statutes, initiations, and secrecy that share no small affinity with those of the Carbonari. It is supposed that this society served to mask under innocuous forms political intrigues against Napoleon, and thus passed with the French troops to Naples, where it was transformed and adapted to the new climate. General Giuseppe Rossetti, in a document published by Soriga, claims to have been initiated into the Carbonari in Franche-Comté in 1802. Pardi has uncovered documents suggesting its existence in the Kingdom of Naples as early as March 1804. Colletta, who had close relations with the Carbonari, attests instead that before 1807 it showed no signs of vitality. Certainly its progress was rapid, and within a few years it had penetrated not only almost every region of the kingdom but had also gained ground in Sicily, the Papal States, and elsewhere. If one is to credit what Joachim Murat wrote to Napoleon in 1809, by that time it already had branches in almost all the principal cities of Italy and was plotting Bourbon-inspired, anti-French uprisings.
The organization, rites, symbolism, oaths, etc., show evident affinities with Freemasonry, but it is difficult to say whether these were inherited directly or should be explained by common origins in the *compagnonnage* and the ancient guilds, as Martin Saint-Léon maintains. What clearly distinguishes the Carbonari from Freemasonry, however, are their respective political and moral tendencies: Freemasonry has a predominantly doctrinal character and addresses itself preferably to the higher and more influential classes of society, retaining the naturalistic and Enlightenment imprint of the century in which it arose, and thus tends to undermine Christianity along with every other positive religion; the Carbonari, on the other hand, have essentially practical programs, are open to all classes but prefer the bourgeoisie, military men, officials, and the common people, and preserve a mentality very much in keeping with the traditionally religious and Catholic social elements they recruit, instinctively hostile to the impious and subversive spirit of Jacobinism. The "Grand Master of the Universe," whom they honor as the supreme being, is to be identified with Jesus Christ the Saviour; in the diplomas of the sect a cross surrounded by the symbols of the Passion and Redemption is given pride of place; the Carbonari catechism is steeped in religious and Christian symbolism; the patron saint invoked by the sect is St. Theobald, Count of Champagne (1017–66), who abandoned worldly comforts to lead an ascetic life in the woods, practicing the trade of a charcoal burner. Admission to the sect was through initiations and degrees (apprentice, master), and the hierarchy consisted of a "raggente," two assistants, an orator, a secretary, a treasurer, an archivist; there were expert or "terrible" masters charged with subjecting candidates to ritual trials; and "copritori" responsible for internal discipline of the assemblies, which were distinguished into "chambers of honor" (partial assemblies) and "barracks" (general assemblies).
Members were called "buoni primi" or "buoni cugini." A regularly constituted nucleus was termed a "vendita"; a group of "vendite" in a given region formed a "madre vendita"; at the summit was a supreme hierarchy called the "alta vendita." The terminology, which Freemasonry derived from the building trade, in the Carbonari was taken from the charcoal burner's craft: hence we hear talk of axes, woods, wolves, forges, barracks, and so on. What most distinguishes the Carbonari from Freemasonry, however, is their respective political ideals. The former seeks to influence society through established powers and therefore strives to align itself with rulers and influential persons in power, readily supporting them; the Carbonari, by contrast, have few but well-defined principles from which they rarely deviate, such as the abolition of despotism, the establishment of democratic and constitutional forms, the right of peoples to self-determination, and national independence—a program, that is, essentially practical, autonomous, and revolutionary.
Soon the Neapolitan Carbonari were torn by opposing currents: one Masonic and Murattian, subservient to Murat’s policies; the other Anglo-Bourbon, aiming to restore Ferdinand IV to the Neapolitan throne. Thanks to the skill of Lord Bentinck, who persuaded the Bourbon monarch to meet the Carbonari’s aspirations by posing as a constitutional king and champion of Italian independence and unity under the Bourbon banner, the second current prevailed. It fused together liberal demands and reactionary tendencies, turning the Carbonari into a formidable weapon in the hands of England against Murat’s government. Murat reacted with extreme severity in the proscription edict of 14 April 1814, which led to inquisitions, trials, and not a few death sentences. With the fall of Napoleon, the deposed princes restored by the Congress of Vienna immediately enacted exceptionally rigorous laws to
The shoulders of society were shaken by secret societies, and by Freemasonry in particular, which was already widespread across almost the entire peninsula and considered the most dangerous of all. Even Cardinal Pacca, pro-secretary of State to Pius VII, who admits (cf. Il mio secondo ministero, in A. Quacquarelli, La ricostituzione dello Stato pontificio, Città di Castello 1945, p. 168) that on his arrival in Rome he did not even know the name of Freemasonry, issued a condemnatory edict on 15 August 1814: “to our great surprise,” he said, “we learned that the Freemasons were circulating a supposed papal brief approving their secret society. It was therefore necessary to refute this imposture and to warn the people.” This was followed by the first emigrations, mostly voluntary, of Freemasons who thus became disseminators and apostles of the sect across almost all Mediterranean countries, especially in France, Spain and Portugal. Disappointed in its hopes for the Bourbons, the Neapolitan Freemasonry threw itself once more into the arms of Murat and supported his reckless attempt to make himself king of Italy. After the tragic end of that adventure, a severe reaction followed, and Prince Canosa, appointed minister of police, “dared to propose in full council the favouring of the sect of the Calderari, to serve as a counterweight to that of the Freemasons” (W. Mauri, Il principe Canosa, Firenze 1944, pp. 129-33).
The Congress of Vienna, which was meant to heal the wounds Italy had suffered under French rule, only inflicted new ones. By placing the peninsula at Austria’s mercy, it gave legitimate grounds for discontent and an incentive to conspiracy; these conspiracies now took on a more seductive appearance, surrounded as they were by noble and generous ideals that captivated peoples and even sovereigns. Filippo Buonarroti (1761-1837), an old conspirator and Freemason, in Geneva set about reuniting the scattered threads of Freemasonry, gathering together the countless lodges, and strengthening its discipline, ritualism and secrecy with severe sanctions. As head of the Alta Vendita Suprema, the Masonic, Enlightenment and anti-clerical influence grew stronger under his leadership, and Freemasonry gradually assumed a certain international character. Wherever there were popular or civic grievances to promote—whether in Spain, France, Greece or more distant lands—Freemasonry took root, more or less covertly, and aligned itself with other societies.
From Freemasonry sprang countless sects with the most varied names, among which the most prominent were the Confederazione Latina, widespread and powerful in the Papal Legations; the Federazione, in the subalpine regions; the Adelfia, especially in the ecclesiastical states; and the Guelphia, believed to be inspired by Bentinck. Attempts at large-scale insurrection soon followed, particularly in areas already prone to inflammatory uprisings, such as Romagna, the Marches, Abruzzi and the Kingdom of Naples; the most notable occurred between 1816 and 1817 in the Marches and in 1817 in Terra d’Otranto. The success of the Spanish revolution infused Italian Freemasonry with greater boldness, and the result was the revolutions of Naples in 1820 and of Piedmont in 1821. Yet the difficulty of coordinating such disparate and fragmented forces, together with the inexperience of those who led the movement, made it easy for Austria—tasked by the great powers assembled at Troppau—to suppress these uprisings and restore absolutist governments. Thus came to nothing the fruits, not entirely revolutionary, of this first period of conspiracies.
A powerful reaction, led by Metternich, succeeded in breaking up and dispersing the sectarian ranks and sent many of the compromised into exile. Freemason affiliation was equated by Austria with the crime of high treason, punishable by death. The mild Pius VII, pressed insistently by the courts to break with Naples and assist their repressive action with spiritual penalties, did not comply; only later, on 13 September 1821, did he issue the bull *Ecclesiam*, in which Freemasonry was expressly condemned, the excommunication and other penalties against it renewed in line with those imposed on Freemasonry, with the declaration that the condemnation was not inspired by political motives but by the pseudo-religious character the sect displayed, and because under the guise of “a singular observance and a certain affected favour for the Catholic religion and for the person and doctrine of Jesus Christ” it instilled impious doctrines and practices, undermined respect for every positive religion, and promoted an individual religion according to each person’s opinions and tastes. The Apostolic Penitentiary, in response to queries from the Neapolitan episcopate on 8 November 1821, declared that “given the wicked dogmas and precepts of such a society, and in particular the licence it grants each person to fashion religion according to their whim,” it should be considered “a rash and heretical sect,” and therefore the papal condemnation was to be understood in the strictest sense. The condemnation was later confirmed by Leo XII in the bull *Quo graviora* of 13 March 1825, by Pius IX in the encyclical *Qui pluribus* of 9 November 1846, and by Leo XIII in the encyclical *Humanum genus* of 20 April 1884, and was inserted into canon 2335 of the *Codex Iuris Canonici* with the penalty of excommunication *simpliciter reservata* and other spiritual penalties.
Buonarroti, together with Passano, once again took charge of reorganising Freemasonry, establishing its central lodge in Paris, from which orders and directives henceforth emanated. After the July Revolution of 1830, which had a powerful echo in Italy as across Europe, a general uprising began. It started in Modena on 4 February 1831, through the efforts of Ciro Menotti, who ended on the scaffold; the insurrection then spread from Bologna and Romagna to the Marches and Umbria, reaching almost to the gates of Rome. The agitators, having tried to attract to their programme the two sons of Louis Bonaparte, former king of Holland—Louis Napoleon, future Emperor of the French, and Napoleon Louis—with the lure of a throne, were soon overwhelmed by the numerous veterans of the Napoleonic Wars, who took control and gave these movements a character all their own. Elected pope, Gregory XVI invited Austria to restore order, and the revolt was quickly crushed. The failure plunged Freemasonry into deep depression; Giuseppe Mazzini, who had been active in its ranks since 1827, drew from the recent events before his eyes and from past experience the conviction that Freemasonry carried within itself the causes of its own failure—namely, the lack of ideas, a well-defined programme and young, dynamic energies—and was no longer capable of reform. The men on whom Freemasonry relied, such as Barthe and La Fayette, were now old and outmoded. Mazzini therefore resolved to found *Giovine Italia* (Young Italy), which began in July 1831 in Marseilles and rapidly attracted the best elements, thus dealing Freemasonry a mortal blow.
Yet the claims of many historians that Freemasonry disappeared after 1831 are exaggerated. In France and in the most important centres of emigration—Corsica, Malta, Corfu, Tunis, and in certain parts of Italy—it reconstituted its ranks and resumed its activities, often in opposition to *Giovine Italia* and frequently undoing what the latter had built. Nevertheless, in the Romagna uprisings of 1843 and those of Rimini in 1845, the two movements worked in concert. A resurgence of Freemasonry in Calabria
The activities of the brothers Romeo sparked in 1847 those Calabrian-Sicilian uprisings which, together with the revolt of Palermo, were the clarion call of the national insurrection of 1848. However, as Cattaneo observes, it had been led astray by shrewd Sardinian agents, among the first of whom was d'Azeglio, in the service of the Carolean cause; and it may well have been that very “royal faction” which armed the hand that murdered Pellegrino Rossi. After the fall of the Roman Republic, the first nucleus of the national association which Mazzini intended to establish before leaving Rome consisted of Mazzinians and Carbonari. “The Carbonari,” De Cesare would later write (Roma e lo Stato del Papa, I, Rome 1907, p. 158), “had never died in Rome; indeed, in the lowest strata of Trastevere one might say that they survived with their oaths, their ideals of equality, and the symbolism of their rites.” A Carbonarist revival occurred in Portugal in 1907, complete with its vendite, baracche, alte vendite, etc., and played a significant part in the establishment of the republic.
If the effectiveness of the Carbonari in Italy was not commensurate with their numerical strength, and if their path led not to improvement but to disintegration and progressive degeneration, the causes must be sought in the intrinsic weaknesses already alluded to—particularly in the rivalries that constantly tore them apart and in the corrosive action of informers, which made them easy prey for the police. One might say of them what has been said of Mazzini and Young Italy: that they worked more to the advantage of other parties than of themselves, preparing the ground only for others to reap the harvest.