Italy on the Road to Unification Depicted in Encyclopedias of the Late 19th and Early 20th Century


Korean Minjok Leadership Academy
LWJ



Table of Contents


December 1st 2009
November 28th 2009
October 13th 2009
September 29th 2009
September 29th 2009
September 29th 2009
September 9th 2009
August 25th 2009
August 25th 2009
August 25th 2009



December 1st 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

In short : I love it.
(1) Britannica 1911 : http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/PYR_RAY seems not to have an article on Rattazzi
(2) double check on the publication data of the Vallardi publications; you give 1920es for all three, I believe EMI to be around 1906
(3) As for Battle of Mentana, it says Rattazzi attempted arrest of Garibaldi but he ¡°escaped miraculously.¡± In other encyclopedias, Rattazzi is said to have not involved himself seriously in preventing Garibaldi¡¯s Roman invasion during Battle of Mentana. This discrepancy well exemplifies this article¡¯s distortion of factual information.
to me it reads as if It. Wikipedia is diplomatic where the non-Italian publications are blunt ; not really a discrepancy but a matter of wording
(4) connivenza English connivence, knowledge of a violation, but not acting upon it by a person in charge
(5) Rattazzi chapter - eliminate Pierer from table; not from text.
(6) Wife has a surprising history. Two re-marriages in her life. Exile from Paris. Expertise in literature
Mention her family connections; otherwise reader may ask himself why you include this category
(7) Urbano Rattazzi was Italian statesman. an Italian statesman
(8) Rattazzi¡¯s dilemma, being unable to decide whether to listen to Italian public¡¯s wish or to follow diplomatic orders from France,
or living up to Italian obligations to France by treaty
(9) Encyclopedia predating Risorgimento
I would date the risorgimento as the movement leading to Italian unification, c.1830 to 1870, with its climax in 1859-1861.



November 28th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

looks okay. Rattazzi - one could examine what is implied, but not specifically stated. Omission and implication are different matters.



October 13th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

much better.
(1) table coverage analysis
(1a) Lexicon Vallardi 192?(article:¡®Garibaldi¡¯ not available) do you have the article on Vittorio Emmanuele from this encyclopedia ? if not, throw this encyclopedia out.
(1b) Catholic Encyclopedia : in this table you compare articles with the headline "Garibaldi". The Catholic Encyclopedia has no such article; the statement that the article Papal State, which mentions Garibaldi, does not contain reference to his childhood and marriages, is confusing your reader; such information is not to be expected there, and your atrempt on grading the article on this criterion is showing your bias, rather than that of the Catholic Encyclopedia. I suggest to take it out of this table.
(1c) most readers will show little interest in Garibaldi's childhood, marriage, children and literature. These categories being there is okay. But the central sections should be early influence, life in exile, character development, feats, setbacks. It may be advisable to deal with these in more detail. ex.
Garibaldi's role in the Sardo-Austrian War
Garibaldi's role in the Roman Republic
Garibaldi in Exile 1849-1859
Garibaldi in the War against Austria
Garibaldi's Conquest of Two Sicilies
Aspromonte Campaign
Mentana Campaign
Franco-German War
You may leave the table as it is and add a second one organized by specific events.
(2) IV. Garibaldi as depicted in other articles
remains to be written
(3) Conclusion
To be extended after further work is done.
(4) The article is also hostile towards his literature saying ¡°they lack literary value.¡±
hostile too strong an expression, contradicts your judgment of the encyclopedia (Nordisk) as being objective, two lines further down.



September 29th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

addenda
(1) I prefer Wikipedia English edition over English Wikipedia
(2) Placenames : what rule do you apply ? Nice and Savoia
French : Nice, Savoie; Italian : Nizza, Savoia, English : Nice, Savoy ; as you mostly follow the Italian spelling, I propose the following : use Italian spelling consistently. Where you mention such a place for the first time : Nizza (Nice).
(3) Sardegna. I don't mind the spelling, just readers of 1850-1880 would have been aware that there were two different Sardegnas / Sardinias : the island, and the larger kingdom by that name. With readers of the 21st century, I wonder if you may expect them being able to differentiate.
(4) I cannot understand why the "German" encyclopedias chose not to mention about Garibaldi¢®'s Rome conquest.
And I do not understand what conquest you refer to. Garibaldi never conquered Rome.



September 29th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

(1) concisely summarizes Carlo Felice¡¯s reaction by saying ¡°[Garibaldi] rejected by King Carlo Alberto¡±
double check : Carlo Alberto or Carlo Felice ?
(2) This narrative contradicts what¡¯s on English Wikipedia, a modern encyclopedia, which write of Garibaldi¡¯s expedition in France as ¡°[commander] of the Army of Vosges, an army of volunteers that was never defeated by Prussians¡±. Thus, one possible conclusion regarding such discrepancy can be that Meyers, which is more prone to have a grudge on Garibaldi, is distorting information.
Here I have to give you a lengthy comment. To begin with, English-language literature in the description of the war of 1870-1871 is biased pro-French, anti-Prussian, just by using the term Franco-Prussian War. See my page on that war http://www.zum.de/whkmla/military/19cen/francoger.html.
Any German reader would question : was the Army of the Vosges even facing Prussian troops ? or troops from other German states ? The statement "undefeated by the Prussians" says more about the sympathies of whoever phrased it that way, than about the Army of the Vosges. Let me try read between the lines : did it fight any battle which made it into the history books ? Did it gain any territory from the enemy worthy to mention ? Did they cover any region of vital importance ? If the latter questions may be answered positively, your criticism may be justified.
Keep in mind, Garibaldi was a hero also outside of Italy. The German commander opposing him knew that as well.
You may want to read the Britannica 1911 and Wikipedia articles on the "Franco-Prussian War". In order to give a credible judgment here, you need to establish a more solid basis of knowledge.
(3) English Wikipedia, perhaps due to its American origin,
Rephrase. The Wikipedia, because of its set-up, is supranational, trying to write history without national basis, in an objective way. While U.S. Americans certainly contribute to it significantly, it is open to anyone. It is likely that reference to Garibaldi's intention to partake in the U.S. Civil War has been added to the article by a U.S. citizen, but the origin of the Wikipedia would not necessarily explain this.
(4) look at G2's paper http://www.zum.de/whkmla/sp/1011/g2/jisoo2.html
She does not sort her paper by encyclopedia, but by other criteria, she inserts a lot of tables etc. The organization by encyclopedia forces you to be somewhat repetitive. In my last comment I asked you to put together a timeline.
(5) Notes : note 3 is what I expect. So why notes 13, 14, 18 ?



September 29th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

(1) organization : (A) old articles, (B) recent articles. Within these categories : (a) Italian language articles, (b) non-Italian language articles.
(2) for every encyclopedia : try give date of publication.
(3) as you write in telegram-style, I am not sure how to read some of your comments. Under Meyer you write "Anti-Garibaldi". Consider the possibility that judgment has to be segmentalized; in this part of his life a hero, in that part a vain ex-hero.



September 9th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

(1) Habsburg, not Hapsburg.
(2) Italian figures : go through list of translated biographies on my page, you find more. You are right, it is difficult to find biographies of persons opposed to unification; selection of the personalities of whom to include biographies is one of the ways encyclopedias express their bias.
(3) When you, in your presentation, referred to Vallardi, I am not quite sure which of the three Vallardi editions you referred to (Lexicon, Piccolo Lexicon, Enciclopedia Moderna).
(4) Look into Cronologia (http://cronologia.leonardo.it/), in Italian
(5) Establish a timeline with the following columns : agitation, events interpreted as "domestic affairs" of Italian states, diplomatic events
(6) A pity no Italian encyclopedia prior to 1870 was spotted



August 25th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

see under B



August 25th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

(1) Your notes focus on finding phrases which prove bias. This is one way to operate, but not the only one.
(2) I suggest : a comment on every specific article, describing length, depth (from superfluous to detailed), perspective/bias, perhaps omissions, exaggerations. Be sure to give information on edition, volume, page, URL if online.
(3) Instead of proceeding encyclopedia by encyclopedia, how about proceeding article by article ? Ex.: Garibaldi, Cavour, Rattazzi. Look at conflicts between them and how they are addressed by the various encyclopedias. (Just an option, but this way you may get to the core of the matter faster). I would search for : conflicts between leading figures in regard to how to proceed with unification
Sardinian/Italian violations of international law in the process of unification
The usage of the term "italy" instead of Sardinia (as the state) prior to 1861
You have only a semester left. There are a number of encyclopedias accessible, and many articles related to the matter; find the most efficient way to proceed.
(4) for your information : converting your word file into html provides some difficulties : arrows, quotation marks, apostrophes, ... signs will be garbled unless I fix them, but that is a lot of work. If possible, use less of these



August 25th 2009 . go to LWJ's Log

(1) For every encyclopedia list the edition(s) (years) you are planning to use.
(2) How about sorting the articles you look into as follows : (a) states (Italy, Sardinia, Parma, Modena, Tuscany, Papal State, Two Sicilies, Lombardo-Venetia; (b) personalities : (b1) monarchs and popes, (b2) politicians (pro, con), (c) organizations, (d) events. Many articles, so selection advisable.
(3) The selection of your encyclopedias :
Divide in three groups - (3a) pre-1870 (unification in progress), (3b) 1871-1920 (unification recent history, nationalism dominant political stream), (3c) contemporary (Wikipedia). 3c used to balance the bias of 3a and 3b, but perhaps in Italian edition of Wikipedia you can observe an ongoing bias. As I see it, the bulk of the encyclopedias in your list falls into 3b.