Papal States

PAPAL STATE. - The first nucleus of the P. S. was the Duchy of Rome. The duke, who represented Byzantine supremacy and resided on the Palatine, disappeared under the pontificate of Stephen II, and the Duchy remained, in fact, autonomous and had the pope as head of government. The authentic and juridical basis of the P. S. does not rest on the donation of the emperor Constantine I (v.) to St. Sylvester, which is a forgery (L. Duchesne-P. Fabre, Le Liber censium, I, Paris 1901, pp. 366-69); but on the promise of territorial cessions made, in 754, at Quierzy-sur-Oise (Aisne) by Pepin the Short, who thereby discharged a debt of gratitude toward the pope St. Zachary. Had not the latter, in fact, fearing the hegemony of the Lombards and preferring the protection of the Franks, perhaps legitimized the seizure of power by authorizing its consecration? Having become master of Italy by right of conquest over the Lombards, Pepin granted to the Holy See, in 756, according to the version of the Liber Pontificalis, Comacchio, Ravenna, the region situated between the Apennines and the Adriatic from Forlì to Jesi, Senigallia, Gubbio, Ancona, Faenza, Imola, Bologna, Ferrara; neither the Duchy of Spoleto nor that of Benevento formed part of the donation.

The Lombard king Desiderius had, indeed, restored Faenza and Ferrara, but had failed to keep his other promises; then, under the pontificate of Adrian I, he had reconquered the two cities ceded and moreover threatened Ravenna. Charlemagne hastened to the aid of the Holy See and increased (6 April 774) the P. S. by the Duchies of Spoleto and Benevento, of Luni, Berceto, Parma, Reggio Emilia, Mantua, Monselice, of Venetia, of Istria, of Tuscia and of Corsica. In 787, moreover, he further enriched the Duchy of Rome with the Lombard Tuscia and, to the south, with localities situated on the right bank of the Liri, such as Sora, Arpino, Arce, Aquino, Teano, Capua. The gift was so magnificent that it aroused doubts (P. Kehr, Die sogenannte karolinische Schenkung von 774, in Historische Zeitschrift, 70 [1893], pp. 385-441); but it did not attain its full realization, although subsequently confirmed by Louis the Pious (817), Otto I (13 Feb. 962), Henry II (Apr. 1020; cf. the Liber censuum, I, pp. 363-65; 368-73 and Th. von Sickel, Das Privilegium Ottos I. für die römische Kirche vom Jahre 962 beleuchtet, Innsbruck 1883). One should not exaggerate the importance of the imperial privilege, which represents a diplomatic instrument distinct from reality. Thus the Duchy of Spoleto remained for a long time independent of the Roman Pontiff.

In any case, after a thousand vicissitudes, following the generous concessions of Countess Matilda to Gregory VII, in 1077, confirmed in 1102 to Paschal II, the P. S. crossed the left bank of the Po di Goro, from its mouth in the Adriatic up to the heights of Felonica, skirted the Modenese almost parallel to the Panaro, crossed, near Monte Cimone, the Apennines, then skirted Tuscany near Lake Trasimeno and below Chiusi, and ended below Orbetello. From there the flat coastline along the Mediterranean reached as far as below Terracina. The country became mountainous, and the border, skirting the Abruzzi, ran northward and at the height of the Pass of S. Pellegrino, where it turned eastward and ended at Porto d'Ascoli. Pontecorvo and Benevento remained isolated within the Kingdom of Naples, after this was granted in fief to Charles I of Anjou.

The States of the Church were divided into seven provinces: 1) district of Benevento; 2) Campania and Marittima; 3) Patrimony of St. Peter, increased by the county of Sabina, the terra Arnulphorum, and the cities and dioceses of Narni, Terni, Rieti, Amelia, Todi; 4) Duchy of Spoleto; 5) March of Ancona with the districts of Urbino, of Massa Trabaria and of the land of S. Agata; 6) Romagna; 7) city and county of Bologna.

The administration of each province belonged, with exceptions, to a rector appointed by the pope or, incidentally, by a legate, under whose presidency were held, at irregular intervals, according to the needs of the moment, the parliaments in which the delegates of the communes discussed the affairs concerning their circumscription, apportioned the extraordinary subsidies requested to meet military expenses, contracted obligations and took note of the pontifical decisions. The rectors determined sale prices, authorized or prohibited the export of agricultural products; they also minted a special coin, the papalino, and fixed its rate. A treasurer and a vice-treasurer ensured financial management and the collection of taxes, which came from many sources. A court of justice judged on appeal the sentences issued by local magistrates. A marshal directed the police services and a captain general commanded the army recruited from the feudal militias and the communal militias. The Communes provided weapons and provisions, bore the costs of building or repairing the city's defensive walls and saw to the safety of the communication routes. The fortresses, scattered here and there throughout the territory of each province, were occupied by castellans. The organization of the administrative cadres, not very complex, was enough to guarantee the good management of local interests; however, like all medieval institutions, it left room for arbitrariness, although the subjects of the Holy See had the recourse of appealing to it against the sentences handed down by the rectors.

In the political sphere, on the other hand, the situation was quite confused, according to the direct or indirect dependence of the individual lands on the Church. In some, the Holy See exercised power along feudal lines: there were Communes that enjoyed a semi-freedom and could not elect the podestà; while others, the larger ones, such as Bologna, Ancona, Perugia, elected him themselves. Add to this a quantity of exemption privileges, lavished too freely by the Holy See, which made it difficult for the rulers to discharge their office. Difficulties no less serious were created for them by partisan passions and the struggles for predominance between barons and Communes. From the 13th century onward, the Communes arrogated to themselves a jealous independence in relation to them; at the end of the 13th century and throughout the 14th, barons and fortunate adventurers established tyrannical regimes, to de-

to the detriment alike of the Communes and of the Papacy. In short, around 1300, and throughout the 14th century, a state of anarchy prevailed in the States of the Church, whether continuously or sporadically.

The external danger was no less grave: the Republic of Venice, the Visconti of Milan, and Florence openly or covertly aimed at usurping the lands of the Church; and account had to be taken also of the ambitions of the King of the Romans and of the Angevins of Naples.

In 1308, Venice, which aspired to exploit to its own exclusive advantage the river routes of transit toward upper Italy, occupied Ferrara, with the consent of Francesco d'Este. But through the intervention of Clement V it had to abandon the conquest (Feb. 17, 1313).

If the expedition into Italy of the Emperor Henry VII (1311-13) brought nothing but material damage to Rome, where his troops and those of the King of Naples, vicar of the Holy See, clashed in bloody fighting, the entry into the city of Louis of Bavaria (Jan. 7, 1328) caused the defection of its inhabitants, whose example was followed by numerous cities of the Patrimony of St. Peter and of the Marches. The retreat of the German army (1330) allowed John XXII to win victory over the schism of the antipope Pietro di Corvaro and allowed Benedict XII to eliminate it entirely. But political pacification was far more difficult to achieve. Benedict XII, as he himself said, abhorred war, and believed he could restore the deeply disturbed order, especially in Romagna and the Marches, through conciliation and the repression of the abuses perpetrated by the apostolic agents. But if the constitutions issued for the purpose of promoting the sound administration of the States of the Church incontestably bear the stamp of wisdom, the remonstrances, reproaches, and threats of spiritual or temporal penalties against the Romagnol nobles proved ineffective.

What remained by then of the supremacy of the Holy See? Giovanni de' Manfredi was master of Faenza, the Malatesta tyrannized Rimini, Pesaro, Fano, Fossombrone, Ancona, Osimo, Senigallia, Jesi, Ascoli; Francesco Ordelaffi boasted of the capture of Cesena, Bertinoro, Meldola... Worse still: the Pepoli sold Bologna to Giovanni Visconti (Oct. 16, 1350). The numerical inferiority of the pontifical troops obliged Clement VI to cede its vicariate for a period of twelve years to the powerful lord of Milan (Apr. 28, 1352). In Rome the revolution of May 20, 1347 had brought Cola di Rienzo to power, and that of Dec. 26, 1351 passed power into the hands of Giovanni Cerroni; while Giovanni di Vico aimed at seizing the Patrimony of St. Peter.

In 1353 Innocent VI entrusted the difficult task of remedying such a sorry state of affairs to Cardinal Egidio Albornoz (v.). This man of genius knew how to bend all the rebels to obedience, to reconquer Bologna, and to endow the Italian populations with a legislative code which, apart from some subsequent additions, would remain in force until 1816. Instead of crushing the vanquished with arms, he generously pardoned them and bound them to the Church with real and advantageous ties. Urban V was then able to make his entry into Rome (Oct. 16, 1367); only to return, however, to Avignon (Sept. 1370).

The restoration of the pontifical monarchy, later completed by Gregory XI, as well as the ascendancy procured for the Pope by the happy outcome of the war waged against Bernabò Visconti (1375), aroused the jealousy of Florence, which aspired to seize Tuscany. The cities and towns of the Papal States, discontented with the delayed return of the Pontiff to Italy and with the conduct of his officials, did not resist the intrigues of Florence and raised the banner of revolt, and with the outbreak of the war, known as the War of the Eight Saints, the Church lost the dominions so painfully reconquered (Nov. 1375-76). Breton bands, hired by Gregory XI, eventually reduced the rebels to impotence, and Florence, struck by the interdict that ruined its commerce, signed the Peace of Sarzana (1378).

With the great Western Schism the struggles intensified: Urban VI and Clement VII thought to put an end to their quarrel with arms. Against the bands of Bretons and Gascons, commanded by Louis of Montjoie, Urban VI opposed the Italian company, commanded by Alberico da Barbiano (Apr. 1379). On Apr. 17 and 20, Clement VII, sacrificing the States of the Church, granted to Louis I, Duke of Anjou, the Ferrarese, the Bolognese, Ravenna, Romagna, Massa Trabaria, the March of Ancona, Perugia, Todi and even the Duchy of Spoleto, with the burden of conquering them within two years. He kept for himself only the Patrimony of St. Peter, Campania, the Marittima, the county of Sabina and Rome. But the contract with Louis of Anjou did not work and the "kingdom of Adria" did not arise, because of the failure to execute its essential clause, which was to conquer it against Urban VI.

The fortunes of the war turned in favor of the Roman Pope; the garrison of Castel Sant'Angelo capitulated from hunger (Apr. 27, 1379) and Alberico da Barbiano, victor at Marino (Apr. 30), entered Cisterna, Rocca di Papa and Marino. But Onorato Caetani, count of Fondi, confirmed by Clement VII as rector of the Campagna and the Marittima, thought only of enlarging his sphere of influence. Giordano Orsini occupied the Alban Hills; Francesco di Vico repelled the troops sent against him to wrest Viterbo from him and prepared to extend his domains in the Patrimony of St. Peter. At Ravenna, Cesena, and Ancona the castellans bargained openly or secretly with Clement VII. The most terrible adversary of Urban VI, Rinaldo Orsini, count of Tagliacozzo, fought successfully for six years, aided by condottieri, until his tragic end (Apr. 14, 1390) made it possible to recover Orvieto and the Duchy of Spoleto. In 1408, the fortunes of the Papal States remained greatly compromised by the entry into the Vatican (Apr. 25) of the King of Naples, Ladislaus of Durazzo, on the pretext of upholding the party of Gregory XII, in reality out of pure political interest: the capture of Perugia revealed his true intentions and compromised him. Florence, uneasy at his progress and bound to the obedience of Alexander V, the Pope of the Council of Pisa, organized a punitive expedition, with the support of Louis II of Anjou, to drive Ladislaus from Rome. Once the enterprise succeeded, the Republic had to be recompensed with the grant of Romagna (Apr. 22, 1410) and, on June 25, 1412, a treaty had to be concluded with the King of Naples granting him Perugia, Ascoli, Viterbo, and Benevento. The Neapolitan troops still occupied Rome for a long time, so much so that Martin V (Nov. 11, 1417), an uncontested pope, had to reside for two years in Florence.

From the turmoil of the great Schism there derived a phenomenon of primary importance: the Communes conquered autonomy and wrested from the popes, deprived of financial resources and political authority, a kind of municipal charter, which assured them independence and allowed them to treat as power to power with the Papacy, to elect their own magistrates, to mint coin, and to hire troops. Even more: Città di Castello, Fermo, Ascoli, Bologna, etc., obtained the vicariate in temporal matters, in exchange for the payment of an annual census. Such concessions, stipulated only on a temporary basis, were renewed upon their expiration, always on account of financial straits.

In the Campagna and the Marittima the minor communes had to fear the interference of the barons. From the heights of their fortresses, perched on the mountains, the nobles controlled the countryside and thus constituted principalities. In the March of Ancona and in Romagna there existed very numerous vicariates, more or less extensive, held by the Montefeltro, the Malatesta, the Polenta, etc. Alberto d'Este obtained in perpetuity the city and county of Ferrara (23 June 1389). In short, in the 15th century the popes were no longer masters in their States, or were so only nominally; and from Eugenius IV onward they saw the necessity of re-establishing their authority; and the principal architects of the restoration of the temporal power were Alexander VI and Julius II.

The nepotism that clouded the memory of Alexander VI had an unexpected result. Cesare Borgia (v.) dreamed of creating for himself a powerful State in central Italy; for this it was necessary to bring about the fall of the vassals established in Romagna, in the Marches, and in the Campagna. He succeeded, in fact, by every means in subduing the vassals and in proudly giving himself the title of duke of Romagna, of Urbino, Senigallia and Perugia (Jan. 1503). But the death of Alexander VI (18 Aug. 1503) brought about his fall, and the Church inherited his conquests. Julius II had decided to free his States from the unjust usurpers; after having, with the assistance of Louis XII, king of France, recovered the lands usurped by Venice, he turned against his ally, and as early as 1510 announced his plan to fight him; then he placed himself at the head of a strong army and recovered Bologna.

Under Leo X, Francesco Maria della Rovere, from whom the Pope had taken the Duchy of Urbino, returned to the field in 1517 and easily retook his domains. Toward the end of the 16th century, the dynasty of the Este having come to an end, Ferrara returned under the direct dominion of the Holy See; a few decades later the same happened with the Duchy of Urbino upon the extinction of the Della Rovere. Meanwhile the institution of legates and vice-legates, already sketched out in the 14th century, became the general rule (v. LEGAZIONI).

In the 18th century, the French travelers who visited the Papal States attest unanimously that the populations lived happily under an essentially paternal regime. Not that everything was perfect: by the admission of Pius VII there was no administrative uniformity; judicial power depended on a quantity of particular or privileged tribunals, whose jurisdictions became entangled and clashed with one another; all attempts at reform had failed because of the collision of private interests and of attachment to old habits (motu proprio of 6 July 1816, in Bullarii continuatio, XIV, Rome 1849, p. 47).

The problem of the existence of the Papal States arose with the French Revolution. Under the pretext of avenging the assassination of the Frenchman Ugo Bassville (v.), Bonaparte entered Bologna on 19 June, and on the 23rd imposed there an armistice, which entailed the occupation of the legations of Bologna and Ferrara and of the citadel of Ancona. The negotiations for a peace treaty, expected within a short time, having failed through the fault of the Directory, the Treaty of Tolentino (17 Feb. 1797) sanctioned the loss «in perpetuity ... of the territories known under the name of legations of Bologna,

(Int. Giordani)
PAPAL STATE - Decree by which the French general, Governor of Rome, restores to the President of the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy, Msgr. Giuseppe Cardoni, part of the Palace of the Academy, occupied by French troops (12 July 1849) - Rome, Archive of the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy.

Ferrara and of Romagna". Umbria and several cities of the Marches remained occupied by the troops of the French Republic until the complete payment of an enormous war contribution.

The killing of Adjutant General Duphot (v.), in the course of a deliberately provoked clash between innovators sympathetic to the French and pontifical troops, gave rise to a new French invasion: on 15 February 1798 the Republic was proclaimed and Pius VI was dragged into exile.

When Austria then compelled the invader to withdraw, it claimed to keep the Legations for itself, while the king of Naples occupied the territory comprised between Rome, inclusive, and Terranova (November 1799). The two governments withdrew only after the French return on the offensive; but the Treaty of Lunéville (9 February 1801) provisionally assigned the Legations to France. The Treaty of Florence (28 March) freed the Holy See from the Neapolitans.

Having returned to his capital, Pius VII granted his subjects a new constitutional arrangement (Post diuturnas, 30 October 1800), which modified the ancient institutions, harmonizing them with the needs and ideas of the times. Thanks to the wise administration of Consalvi, Secretary of State, the country began to recover. But beginning in 1805, relations between Napoleon I, consecrated emperor, and Pius VII became stormy because of the refusal to adhere to the continental blockade. A decree of 17 May 1809 stripped the Holy See of all its States and annexed them to the French Empire. Rome, formally declared a free city, was in fact imperial. Pius VII himself, brutally imprisoned during the night of 5-6 July, was taken to Savona and then to Fontainebleau.

On 25 March 1814 Napoleon I restored liberty to the august prisoner, because, among other things, he was anxious to thwart the designs of Joachim Murat, king of Naples, upon the pontifical domains. Austria, in fact, in order to have the Emperor's brother-in-law among the coalition sovereigns, had guaranteed to Murat, by secret agreements (11 and 14 January

1814) "an acquisition, calculated on the scale of 400,000 souls, to be made at the expense of the Roman State" (cf. H. Weil, Le prince Eugène et Murat, III, Paris 1902, pp. 614-19; attached document no. XLVI).

Once the Pope had returned to Rome, after many vicissitudes and despite the opposition of Murat, he learned the outcome of the negotiations begun in Paris, following the fall of the French Empire. Art. VI of the Treaty of 30 May 1814 specified: "Italy, outside the boundaries of those countries which will fall to Austria, shall be composed of sovereign States"; and among the latter, in art. II of the annex, only the Kingdom of Sardinia appeared! (L. Neumann, Recueil des traités et conventions conclus par l'Autriche depuis 1763, II, Leipzig 1856, pp. 466-74).

Cardinal Consalvi, charged with the negotiations with the allied sovereigns, on 23 June 1814, by a note of protest to all the great powers, demanded "the full enjoyment of all the domains of which the French Revolution had deprived the Holy See" (cf. Ch. van Duern, Correspondance du card. Hercule Consalvi avec le prince Clément de Metternich, 1815-23, Louvain 1899, pp. 33-40). During the Congress of Vienna everyone vied with one another in disputing the spoils of the Holy See; and the most dangerous adversaries were precisely Austria and Murat. There then occurred a memorable skirmish between Consalvi, on the one hand, and Talleyrand and Metternich on the other. The allies were unanimous in upholding the validity of the cession of the legations, stipulated in the Treaty of Tolentino, and considered themselves the legitimate holders of the whole of the Napoleonic conquests in Italy. After "days of martyrdom," in the cardinal's expression, art. 103 of the definitive Treaty (9 June 1815) restored to the Church Pontecorvo and Benevento, the legations of Ravenna, Bologna and Ferrara, excepting the part of the Ferrarese situated on the left bank of the Po, the Marches with Camerino and their dependencies (L. Neumann, op. cit., II, p. 713).

After the execution of the Treaty of Vienna, which encountered the greatest difficulties on the part of Austria and the court of Naples, Pius VII with a motu proprio of 6 July 1816 promulgated a Statute for the Papal States (Bull. rom. continuatio, XIV, Rome [1849], pp. 47-79 and the particular regulations required by the Edict, pp. 83-196) and instituted seventeen legations, divided into three classes: first class or legations: Urbino and Pesaro, Ravenna, Forlì, Bologna; second: Frosinone, Viterbo, Perugia, Macerata, Fermo, Ancona, Spoleto; third: Benevento, Rieti, Civitavecchia, Camerino and Ascoli. The legation of Ferrara remained outside the classes. The district of Rome, with its own organization, comprised the surroundings of the city and the governments of Subiaco and Tivoli. The four legations went to cardinals or, by way of exception, to prelates with the title of vice-legates; the others were headed by delegates, who had to be prelates. Each delegate was assisted by an advisory Council, composed of members chosen by the Pope, and had power over all the governors of his jurisdiction, also appointed by the sovereign. The municipalities were administered by a gonfaloniere, with the help of elders. The civil and penal codes underwent a profound reform. The cadastre, the finances, public instruction, the army and the police received a new organization. The laity deplored being excluded from the major offices, such as those of legates and delegates. Two Edicts of 5 Oct. 1824 and of 21 Dec. 1827 brought modifications to the administrative division of the Roman State, which was divided into thirteen delegations. The code of civil procedure was simplified (Bullarii Romani continuatio, XIV, Rome 1849, pp. 128-255; XVII, ibid. 1855, pp. 113-291).

The reforming work carried out by Pius VII at the inspiration of Cardinal Consalvi was in part neutralized by Leo XII. The populations deplored the suppression of some provisions of the Napoleonic Code, the bad administration of the finances, the unjust distribution of the lands, the partiality in the magistracy. And since discontent was almost universal in Italy, there developed sects such as the Carbonari, who professed a violent hostility against absolute monarchies and drew their members from all social classes. They found favor also in the Papal States, and on 4 Feb. 1831 revolutionary disorders broke out in Bologna, which rapidly won over Romagna, the Marches and Umbria, and an army, commanded by General Sercognani, marched on Rome. Gregory XVI, who did not have sufficient military forces, had recourse to Austria. General Krabowski entered Bologna on 21 March and on the 26th the insurgents capitulated. This occupation by Austria assured its hegemony in Italy, where it already possessed the Lombardo-Venetian Kingdom. Therefore the European courts strove to put an end to it. On 21 May 1831, a Memorandum was presented to the Court of Rome (cf. the text in Rina del Piano, Roma e la Rivoluzione del 1831, Inada 1931, with unpublished documents, p. 343), which proposed a series of administrative reforms capable of ensuring public tranquillity and the reestablishment of the motu proprio of 6 July 1816. The Pontiff did not accept the veiled imposition of the Memorandum, and by promising adequate reforms induced the Austrians to evacuate the Papal States (15 July).

These administrative reforms, quite complex and important, represent a development of Consalvi's work, and were gradually implemented over the course of the entire pontificate, but too often, out of partisan passion, they proved pleasing neither to the liberals nor to the absolutists. Meanwhile, in order to impose their initial application and restore the lost authority in the legations, a pontifical army took the offensive (18 Jan. 1832); but, after triumphing over the rebels on the day of the 20th, it could not prevent a general uprising of the population, and the Austrians, called in for help, re-entered Bologna on the 28th; on 23 Feb. some French battalions took possession of Ancona. Foreign troops thus maintained order in the Papal States until 4 Dec. 1838.

A new factor was added: the heated Mazzinian propaganda of the ideas of liberty and of national independence and unity, which centered on the organization of "Young Italy." A coup attempted at Rimini in 1845 made clear the imminence of the danger. Moderate liberals and Neo-Guelphs, to whom the revolutionary acts preached by Mazzini were repugnant, demanded constitutional reforms better suited to the tendencies of the time: Gli ultimi casi di Romagna, a pamphlet that appeared in 1846, aroused a considerable echo in Europe. Its author Massimo d'Azeglio declared himself there a partisan of constitutional monarchy and did not conceal his sympathies for the king of Sardinia, Charles Albert, destined, according to his forecasts, to carry out the great work of liberation from the foreign yoke.

Well informed about the legitimate ambitions of his contemporaries "troubled by the fever of reforms and innovations," Pius IX was anxious to satisfy them. He hoped in this way to isolate the Mazzinian party and to prevent it from succeeding in creating a republican unity in Italy. He began with the usual act of clemency: the decree of amnesty (July 16, 1848) promised pardon to those exiled by his predecessor, to deserters, and to those condemned for political crimes (cf. Atti del Sommo Pontefice Pio IX, part 2, I, Rome 1857, pp. 4-7, and A. Mercati, In margine all'amnistia concessa da Pio IX, in Aevum, 24 [1950], pp. 103-32). A whole set of useful reforms obtained almost universal approval, except that of Metternich. But the Fundamental Statute for the temporal government of the States of the Holy See, which established a kind of constitutional regime, moreover much mitigated (March 14, 1848), constituted the stumbling block (cf. Atti, cit., I, pp. 228-38). The prudent measures adopted alarmed the partisans of the old state of things, dissatisfied those eager for novelty, and satisfied only the moderates. The refusal to participate in the war of independence against Austria aggravated the situation: nor did the energetic hand of Pellegrino Rossi succeed in setting it right again. The revolution that followed in Rome upon the assassination of this minister (Nov. 15, 1848) decided the Pope to go to Gaeta, in Neapolitan territory (Nov. 24), in order to safeguard his religious freedom. Thus the extremists prevailed over the neo-Guelphs and the moderates. A constituent assembly radically crushed the Roman Question: art. 1 of the decree, voted in the night of February 8-9, 1849, declared that the Papacy "had fallen in fact and in law from the temporal government of the Roman State," and, in article 3, that "the form of government of the Roman State shall be pure democracy and shall take the glorious name of Roman Republic" (cf. G. Spada, Storia della rivoluzione di Roma, III, Florence 1870, pp. 201-205).

On February 18 the diplomatic corps accredited to the Holy See received a note requesting the armed intervention of Austria, France, Spain, and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. On July 3 the troops of General Oudinot took possession of Rome, after stubborn fighting; Ferrara, the Bolognese, the Marches, and Ancona were occupied by the Austrians (G. Mollat, Les débuts de l'occupation française à Rome en 1849, d'après une correspondance inédite, in Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique, 30 [1934], pp. 334-60, 587-619).

Before returning to his States, Pius IX had an edict of reform and a decree of amnesty published (Sept. 12, 1849; cf. Atti, cit., I, pp. 286-94). Instead of political liberties, the cycle of administrative innovations was resumed and accentuated with excellent provisions, which nevertheless appeared as a reaction against the liberal measures adopted, more or less spontaneously, in 1848. Nonetheless, thanks also to the presence of foreign troops, calm in the Papal States lasted until 1859. Many, however, thought that it was an apparent calm. The true feelings of the innovators of the legations manifested themselves openly at the outbreak of the war between Piedmont and Austria. As soon as the Austrians quartered at Bologna had left (June 12, 1859), these men, in agreement with those of the Marches, of Orvieto, and of Perugia, sent emissaries to Turin to come to an agreement with the King of Sardinia.

The offer was not accepted immediately for fear of displeasing Napoleon III. But when Cavour had the assurance that Europe would adopt a policy of non-intervention, using as a pretext the disturbances fomented by himself underhandedly in Umbria and the Marches, he demanded that order be restored there: therefore the Sardinian regiments penetrated into pontifical territory, overcoming the resistance of the scanty pontifical troops at Castelfidardo (Sept. 18, 1860). A royal decree of Dec. 17 made effective the annexation of the Marches and of Umbria to the Kingdom of Sardinia (cf. Traités publics de la Maison de Savoie, VIII, pp. 913-915). The Holy See retained no more than the delegations of Civitavecchia and of Viterbo, that of Velletri and of Frosinone as well as the surroundings of Rome.

The proclamation of Victor Emmanuel as king of Italy (March 17, 1861) and the speeches delivered in Parliament by Cavour (March 25-27) constituted an open threat to the future of Rome. Some attempts at conciliation made from 1860 to 1862 came to nothing, while the small Papal State, reduced to a territory for the most part uncultivated, lived with difficulty. The Convention of Sept. 15, 1864, signed with France, stipulated the gradual withdrawal of the French troops, to be replaced by pontifical forces promptly constituted (H. von Srbik, La Convenzione segreta tra l'Austria e la Francia del 12 giugno 1862, in Rivista storica italiana, 3 [1937], pp. 1-60). These forces, flanked in the end by a new French expeditionary corps, won, after more than a month of struggle against Garibaldian columns, the decisive victory of Mentana (Nov. 3-4, 1867). But in 1870 the departure of the French brigade that had remained in Rome, brought about by the outbreak of the war with Germany, and the consequent defeat, left the hands free for the royal government, and on Sept. 20, after five hours of firm resistance, by disposition of the Pontiff Rome capitulated. - See plates LXXXVII-LXXXVIII.

Papes d'Avignon, 9th ed., ibid. 1950 (with abundant critical bibl.); J.-M. Vidal, Benoît XII et l'Italie. Introd. aux lettres closes et patentes de Benoît XII, ibid. 1950; Pastor, I-XVI. On the period of the French Revolution and of the 19th century: the bibl. in G. Mollat, La Question Romaine, de Pie VI à Pie IX, 2nd ed., Paris 1932; the most important works may be added: A. Vigevano, La fine dell'Esercito Pontificio, Rome 1921; id., La campagna delle Marche e dell'Umbria, ibid. 1923; C. Vidal, Louis Philippe, Metternich et la crise italienne de 1831-32, Paris 1931; J. J. Brady, Rome and the neapoliton Revolution of 1820-21, New York 1937; P. Dalla Torre, L'anno di Merutana, Turin 1938; M. Petrocchi, La restaurazione, il card. Consolv. e la riforma del 1816, Florence 1941; A. Ventrone, L'amministrazione dello S. P. dal 1814 al 1870, Rome 1942; M. Petrocchi, La restaurazione romana, ibid. 1943; P. Dalla Torre, L'opera riformatrice ed amministrativa di Pio IX dal 1830 al 1870, Rome 1945; M. Nobili-S. Camerani, Carteggio di Bettino Riccati, 4 vols., Rome 1945-47; P. Pirri, La missione di mons. Corbati Bussi in Lombardia e la crisi della politica ital. di Pio IX, in Riv. di stor. della Chiesa in Italia, 1 (1947), pp. 38-84; R. Moscati, Le scritture della Segreteria di Stato degli affari esteri del Regno di Sardegna, Rome 1947 (important inventory of documents); D. Massé, Pio IX e il gran tradimento del '48, Alba 1948; P. Dalla Torre, L'opera riformatrice ed amministrativa di Gregorio XVI, in Gregorio XVI, Miscellanea commemorativa, II, Rome 1948, pp. 29-121; id., Pellegrino Rossi, il Neo-guelfismo e l'Italia, in Arch. della Sor. Romana di Storia Patria, 71 (1948), pp. 163-68; P. Pirri, La politica unitaria di Pio IX dalla lega doganale alla lega italica, in Riv. di stor. della Chiesa in Italia, 2 (1948), pp. 183-214; E. de Levis Mirepoix, Un collaborateur de Metternich, Mémoires et papiers de Lebellière, Paris 1949; A. Ghisalberti, Rapporti delle cose di Roma, 1848-49, Rome 1949 (despatches of the diplomatic agent of the Netherlands); P. Dalla Torre, Pio IX e la Restaurazione del 1849-50, in Acum, 23 (1949), pp. 267-98; P. Pirri, Pio IX e Vittorio Emanuele II dal loro carteggio privato. La questione Romaine, 2 vols., Rome 1951; G. Mollat, La Question Romaine sous Grégoire XVI et Pie IX, in Revue des sciences religieuses, 26 (1952), pp. 132-42.

Guglielmo Mollat