Back in the fall of 1943, the territory of Italy was divided in two. Its southern part was occupied by American-British troops, and the German occupation of the northern and part of the central regions dragged on for almost two years.

In the southern part of Italy, the government formed by Badoglio from “specialists” did not have any support among the people and did not enjoy authority among the Anglo-American authorities. The anti-fascist parties were not united on the issue of attitude towards the monarchy, since the Action Party and the Socialists demanded the immediate abdication of the king.

This made it possible for the occupying powers to sabotage the decision of the Moscow Conference of Foreign Ministers of the USSR, the United States and England on the need to include in the government “representatives of those sections of the Italian people who have always opposed fascism.”

In the spring of 1944, the Soviet Union took a new step, indicating its desire to promote the granting of sovereign rights to the Italian people. In March, direct diplomatic relations between the Soviet Union and Italy were restored.

On March 29, the leader of the Italian communists, P. Togliatti, proposed the creation of a government of national unity, postponing the decision on the monarchy until after the end of the war. The Communist Party's proposal was the only possible way out of the impasse, and all anti-fascist parties agreed with it.

On April 24, 1944, a new government was formed under the chairmanship of Badoglio, which, together with other anti-fascist parties, included the communists for the first time in Italian history.

After the liberation of Rome, the government was reorganized: the leader of the Labor Democracy Party, I. Bonomi, became the chairman of the Council of Ministers, and anti-fascist parties gained predominant influence in the government.

The most important events took place during this period on the other side of the front. The true masters of Northern Italy were the Nazis, who established strict control over all the activities of the Italian administration.

They carried out a systematic export of industrial raw materials and equipment, food, and various valuables from Northern Italy. Skilled workers and captured Italian soldiers were forcibly sent to Germany.

Without even notifying Mussolini, Hitler tore the region of Venice, along with Trieste, from Italy and included it in the Reich.

After his return to power in Northern Italy, Mussolini publicly declared the “anti-capitalism” of the neo-fascist party he created.

In November 1943, the “Verona Manifesto” of the neo-fascist party was published, which contained a number of demagogic promises, including the convening of a Constituent Assembly, the “socialization” of enterprises through the participation of workers in their management, freedom of criticism, etc.

However, such promises could not deceive, especially since the fascists, soon after they proclaimed the “Social Republic”, began organizing a wide network of repressive bodies. “Special tribunals” were established in all provinces, and special police units were created everywhere to help the Gestapo, which dealt with anti-fascists without trial or investigation.

Having disbanded the royal army, Mussolini tried to create armed forces to continue the war on the side of Germany. However, numerous recruitments into this army did not produce results, since most of those mobilized preferred to go to the mountains.

The four Italian fascist divisions, as well as various paramilitary organizations such as the "black brigades", "Mussolini's battalions", etc., were completely occupied with actions against the partisans.

On the day the German occupation began, September 9, 1943, the anti-fascist parties in Rome formed the Committee of National Liberation. It included representatives of six parties: Communist, Socialist, Action Party, Labor Democracy Party, Christian Democratic and Liberal.

Although representatives of all parties advocated the development of armed struggle, in fact, right-wing parties did their best to slow down the development of mass resistance and sought to turn the Committee into a consultative inter-party body.

As a result of the paralyzing influence of the bourgeois parties, which found support from the leaders of the Vatican, the Roman Committee for National Liberation failed to become a combat center for the leadership of the partisan movement. Despite the heroic efforts of the communists and representatives of some other parties who created partisan detachments around the city, Rome turned out to be one of the few Italian cities where the struggle of the patriots did not culminate in a victorious uprising.

The situation was different in Northern Italy: the Milan Committee of National Liberation, which took the name of the Committee of National Liberation of Northern Italy, from the first days of its existence became the true political leader of the Resistance movement.

Numerous national liberation committees were associated with him, created in regions, cities, villages, and sometimes in neighborhoods and individual enterprises. These bodies in Northern Italy consisted of representatives of five parties (there was no Democratic Labor Party).

The leading role of the left parties, and especially the communists, manifested itself in full force in the North. The communists were the first to begin the struggle in the cities, creating combat groups of patriotic action, which, through bold raids on enemy headquarters, holding rallies and other actions, immediately created a fighting atmosphere that mobilized the masses for the fight.

In October 1943, the Communist Party began to form the “model Garibaldi brigades” in the mountains, which not only served as the core of the partisan army, but also set an example for other political parties. The Action Party and the Socialists also began to create their own combat units, largely borrowing the organizational principles of the Garibaldi brigades. Later than others, Christian Democrats and Liberals decided to create armed formations.

The Communist Party relied on the powerful support of the working class. Already in the autumn months of 1943, the strike movement in cities such as Turin affected several enterprises simultaneously. In the early spring of 1944, the communists put forward the task of holding a general strike, which they viewed as a dress rehearsal for a national uprising.

The strike began on March 1 following a signal from a specially created committee to lead the movement. It was the largest uprising of the Italian working class; About 1 million workers took part in the movement, supported by more than 20 thousand partisans and numerous groups of patriotic action.

Just as the spring strike of 1943 served as a prelude to the fall of fascism, the movement of 1944 opened the way for a national uprising.

On the initiative of the Communist Party, in the spring of 1944, patriotic action units began to be created in villages, which, starting with the tasks of local self-defense, gradually turned into combat units. The partisan army was widely replenished during this period by young peasants who evaded conscription into the fascist army.

If before March 1944 there were 30 thousand partisans in the mountains, then in the summer the partisan army increased to 80 thousand fighters. The partisans waged continuous offensive battles, liberating vast territories from the Nazis and creating partisan areas. In total, by the autumn of 1944, there were 15 liberated zones in Northern Italy, where power belonged to the national liberation committees.

The summer of 1944 was marked by the political and organizational unity of the Resistance forces. In June, the partisan detachments of the various parties were united under a common command, which took the name Command of the Freedom Volunteer Corps.

The leading position in the command was occupied by the communist L. Longo and the leader of the Action Party F. Parry. During this period, the Committee for the National Liberation of Northern Italy put forward the task of preparing a national uprising and adopted a number of program documents in which it stated that the goal of the uprising was to establish a new democracy in which “all working classes will have a decisive influence.”

It seemed that the liberation of Italy from Hitler's occupation was a matter of several weeks. However, the reality turned out to be different.

In the fall of 1944, in addition to all the armed formations of the Social Republic, at least a third of the German forces in Italy acted against the partisans.

The difficult situation in Italy attracted the close attention of the British Special Operations Executive and the American Office of Strategic Intelligence. Despite some differences between the British and Americans regarding the attitude towards the forces of the Italian Resistance, both of these organizations were of the same opinion on the need to limit the scope of the partisan movement.

Supplying partisans with weapons was used by the Allies as one of the means to make the Resistance dependent on American-British policy, in particular to support anti-communist forces.

Even the Minister of War in the Badoglio government and the military leader of the Italian Resistance, General Cadorna, were forced to declare that the “anti-revolutionary detachments” of the Resistance enjoyed special favor from the Western allies and received the largest amount of weapons and ammunition.

When it was not possible to contain and limit the scope of the people's liberation movement, the American-British command officially prohibited the increase in the number of partisan formations and sent an order to its liaison officers to stop the “indiscriminate” distribution of weapons among the partisans.

Collect and analyze the echoes of the Soviet press and, in general, Soviet historiography on the process of progressive liberation of Central Italy and Tuscany from Nazism We were inspired by the speech of the historian G.S. Filatova (1923-1982) at the conference “Italy from Liberation to the Republic” . Let us also point out Enrico Serra's rich essay “Così Stalin riconobbe l'Italia del 1944” [“So Stalin recognized Italy in 1944”] and two documented publications on the relations of the Resistance movement with the allied forces - a collection of materials from the conference “La Resistenza” e gli Alleati in Toscana [Resistance and Allies in Tuscany]" (Florence, 1964) and David W. Ellwood's monograph "L'alleato nemico. La politica dell'occupazione anglo-americana in Italy [Enemy-ally. The policy of the Anglo-American occupation in Italy]. However, neither these materials nor the numerous literature about Soviet partisans in Italy directly touches on the topic we propose.

The studied documents made it possible to reveal a fact previously ignored by Italian historians: yes, of course, the influence of the great victories of the Red Army over Hitler’s troops, which gave strength to the anti-fascists in Italy, was immutable, but there was also a process of the opposite order. The point is that news of the successes of the allies and partisans in Central Italy (not to mention the opening of the Second Front in France) also helped the Soviet people in the fight against the Nazis. In full, this news could not cause an adequate resonance, since by the summer of 1944 the Red Army had practically cleared Soviet territory of invaders. However, in July 1944, leaflets of the underground in Ukraine still made full reference to the situation in the Apennines, declaring: “Who does not know that the valiant units of our allies are beating the Germans in Italy? Who doesn’t know that Rome has already been liberated from Hitler’s channels, that the liberation of Northern Italy is underway?” .

On July 27, 1944, a leaflet printed by underground workers in the Stanislavsky district, the last in Ukraine not liberated from the Nazis, read: “The earth is burning under the feet of the brown plague. Hitler's vandals sense the inevitable end. The mighty blows of the Red Army in the East combined with the blows of the Anglo-American allies in the West - in Northern France and Italy." The most authoritative assessment of the successes against the Germans came from the lips of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Stalin, who, during his radio speech on November 6, 1944, ranked the cleansing of Italy from the Germans among other victorious military actions.

There is another interesting, albeit not direct, source of these echoes. On August 17, Radio Moscow broadcast a message from Italian prisoners of war from the USSR to the Tuscans, published the next day in Unità: “The prisoners of war express joy at the liberation of Tuscany and Florence from Hitler’s tyranny, and call on Tuscan patriots to continue the fight side by side with the allies. They can’t wait to see Tuscany and all of Italy free as quickly as possible, and the liberated Italian people on the road to a secure future.”

In general, the five months of 1944 - from May 11, the beginning of serious Allied military operations in Italy, until mid-October - became a critical stage not only in the course of the war in Western Europe, but also in the formation of relations between the Allies themselves and European states.

It should be noted that the USSR never perceived the landing at Anzio and the entry of the Allies into Rome as the opening of the long-awaited Second Front. And Churchill himself, in his telegrams to Stalin, interpreted these actions as an “auxiliary result” to Operation Overlord, i.e. for the Allied landings in Normandy. On June 5, 1944, Stalin sent a very dry telegram, limiting himself to two phrases of congratulations on “the capture of Rome, the news of which was received in the Soviet Union with lively satisfaction.” It is also interesting to note that neither Stalin nor Churchill, speaking about Rome, ever used the term “liberation” when speaking about “taking” and “occupation”.

Even after the end of the war, official publications stated that “The Fifth American Army occupied Rome.” This expression cannot but attract attention given that the USSR recognized the Italian (southern) kingdom back in March, which overthrew the power of Mussolini, even though relations with the new Italy were fully established only at the beginning of November 1944. Consequently, we could talk about about liberation, however, the expressions “occupation” and “occupation” remain unchanged in all reports regarding the Apennines - both regarding the actions of the 8th British Army and the 5th American Army, as well as the Indian Division and French detachments. At the same time, all reports hushed up the participation of the Polish army of General Anders in hostilities against the Germans, which we will address below.

On June 5, 1944, the day after the Allies entered Rome, with unusual speed for the Soviet press, the Pravda newspaper published an analytical article by Major General M.R. Galaktionov "Great success of the allies." In it, the author strongly emphasizes the importance of Rome, calling it, among other things, “a citadel of classical monuments of culture and art” (however, erroneously defining it as a “large industrial center”), and predicts - after the loss of Rome - the loss of all of Italy by the Germans in the near future . Galaktionov’s task was to explain to Soviet readers why the Germans surrendered Rome without a fight: he presented this as the result of the skillful tactics of the British commander H. Alexander, launched with a mighty attack on May 11 near Cassino and continued with terrifying tank attacks on the enemy’s weak points. He also disavowed German propaganda’s attempts to present the surrender of Rome as a planned retreat to “pre-prepared positions.” In general, the major general assessed the event as symbolic, carrying “a guarantee of future victories over Nazi Germany.” “The quick and skillful occupation of Rome,” he wrote, “was a powerful blow to fascism, and for the Italian people it opened up the most prosperous prospects for the revival of the country.”

While millions of Soviet readers were getting acquainted with Galaktionov’s article, the Allied landing operation in Normandy was beginning to unfold, which became the actual opening of the Second Front in Europe.

As for the capture of Rome, President Roosevelt emphasized the political rather than the military significance of this fact. In fact, upon the liberation of the country's capital and after various kinds of consultations, King Victor Emmanuel III, who was directly responsible for the catastrophe of the nation, declared his son Umberto (Humbert II) regent. This step, according to the law, led to the resignation of the Badoglio cabinet and the formation of a new government - Bonomi, which also included the anti-fascist philosopher Benedetto Croce and the communist leader Palmiro Togliatti. All this political news was enthusiastically reported by the Soviet press.

While the military success of the Allies began to emerge in Normandy, relations began in Moscow with the ambassador of post-fascist Italy, Pietro Quaroni - he was received by Foreign Minister Molotov, as reported on June 7, 1944 by Pravda. Pravda will return to the importance of the capture of Rome on June 12, 1944, in an interesting commentary by an anonymous observer given to the report of the pro-German Finnish journalist Christopher Schild. According to Schild, quoted by a Soviet newspaper, “the capture of the Italian capital served as a prelude to the gigantic task of landing on the European continent,” although further events “are still difficult to predict.” The Pravda columnist ironically polemicizes with the “frightened Finnish commentator”: the future of those allies that “have not yet broken with Hitler has been decided. Hitler's Germany is heading towards disaster, and its satellites are sliding into the same abyss. The Fuhrer's lackeys will answer for his crimes."

Over the next two months, the Soviet press (we looked at the issues of the newspapers Pravda and Trud) carefully notified readers about the progress of the military campaign in Italy. Usually this is news from the Reuters Agency or the General Headquarters of the Allied Forces, processed by TASS. Often the news in both newspapers is given in the same terms, most often they are published simultaneously, sometimes with a gap of one day. The listed names of “taken” (liberated?) cities allow one to trace the constant advance of troops to the north, several tens of kilometers a day. Probably, the Soviet editors had no time to trace the importance of this or that geographical point: the capture of such important centers as Civitavecchia, Pescara, Chieti and insignificant villages like Avezzano or Canino was reported with equal enthusiasm.

The entry of the Allies into Tuscany was reported with reference to Radio Algiers at the UN: “American military forces have reached Pitigliano.” The same issue of the newspaper reported that “the Germans are preparing to evacuate from Livorno.”

If nothing was said about the capture of Perugia, perhaps because the city was taken by the British, Elbe, occupied by the French, was widely reported. If the Allies did not advance, it was due to bad weather (in mid-June!). Sometimes - probably due to the lack of news - the capture of the unknown Tuscan village of Cecina was suddenly announced, and it was presented as the “city of Cecina”.

On July 5, the Soviet press reported the occupation of Siena and Cortona, and in the following days - the British offensive on Livorno and Arezzo. However, at the first opportunity, Pravda always emphasized the successes of the French in Tuscany. So, for example, much attention was paid to the French occupation of Poggibonsi, while Soviet newspapers clearly did not know that in fact the Moroccans were then marching under the French flag... At the same time, Pravda talked about numerous deportations of Italian citizens to Germany, about the refusal of Italian officers to swear allegiance to Mussolini, about the arrests of fascist dignitaries, about the bombing of allied aircraft and about other military events.

The attention of the Soviet press to the political situation in the territory of liberated (taken?) Italy is noticeable. Thus, on July 12, Pravda talks a lot about Palmiro Togliatti’s speech, and in the following days informs readers about meetings of the new cabinet in Rome, changes in its composition, the revival of trade unions, the resumption of railway communication between Rome and Naples, etc.

One thing is surprising about the reports from Tuscany. It is known that three cities in the northern part of this region - Florence, Prato, Pistoia - were liberated from the Germans mainly by Italian partisans. Soviet reports stubbornly talk about the allied forces, without any mention of the contribution of the partisans. We can hardly talk about TASS’s lack of awareness: above we talked about the dynamism of the information provided. The Soviet side, no doubt, knew well about the partisans in Tuscany: in particular, they were publicly reported on by the propaganda magazine L’Alba, published in Italian for prisoners of war.\

Reprinting, as usual, texts from Soviet newspapers, on August 19, L’Alba published its own extensive report entitled “How the Germans were expelled from Florence,” which sets out events that contradict official reports about the exclusive participation of the Allies in the battle for the city on the Arno. “L’Alba” describes in detail the brutal battles “between the patriots and the Germans”, the capture of the Palazzo della Signoria by the patriots, from where the Liberation Committee led the further struggle. Why didn’t Pravda report all this? What explained her silence?

It seems that the answer here lies both in the course of general military operations on the continent and in the effect of the Warsaw Uprising.

During July-August, there is a noticeable trend of decreasing interest in events in the Apennines in favor of growing attention to the military-political situation in France. In mid-August, the Soviet press was full of news about the final expulsion of the Nazis from the Soviet Union, about the disclosure of their grave crimes.

Dramatic events further developed with amazing speed. Already in the second half of July, after a series of victories, the Red Army advanced through Finnish territory, returning the Karelian Isthmus: as a result, on September 19, 1944, Finland was the first of the countries of the German bloc to surrender, signing a separate peace. After the complete liberation of Belarus and Ukraine by the end of August, the formations of the Red Army advance in various countries of Eastern Europe - from Poland to Slovakia (they approached the borders of Romania back in April). On September 5, the USSR declares war on Bulgaria, the only country from the German bloc that did not enter the war against the Soviet Union.

In different countries, victory over Nazism came in different ways. The situation in Poland was especially difficult, since during the war years the Polish government was in exile in London, with a clear anti-Soviet orientation. The uprising he inspired in Warsaw, which broke out on August 1, 1944, was not coordinated with the Soviet side. As a result, parts of the Red Army, also exhausted from the battles, did not come to the aid of this uprising, which was drowned in blood by the Nazis. After 63 days of resistance, the Poles were defeated, losing about 200 thousand casualties, which also meant the end of the influence of the Polish government in London and the growing importance of pro-communist and pro-Soviet groups. This drama caused serious disagreements between Stalin, on the one hand, and Churchill and Roosevelt, on the other, disagreements that, after the war, moved into polemics between Soviet and Western historians. If Soviet historians insisted on the clarity of the position of the Red Army command, on its loyalty to the Polish resistance and allies, then Western historians reproached the USSR for ambiguous behavior - in the hope of weakening the position of the exile government in London.

It seems that regarding the liberation of Central Italy and Tuscany from Nazism, the Soviet press took an ambivalent position. On the one hand, she emphasized the successes of the partisans in the German-occupied zone. Thus, the newspaper “Pravda” on August 27, 1944 reports in triumphal tones about “large partisan operations behind enemy lines in the province of Pistoia,” about enemy losses, destruction of communications, and so on. At the same time, the Soviet press strongly emphasizes that partisan operations are carried out in close cooperation and in agreement with the allied command - as the Red Army would like to see in the territories it liberates, and, first of all, in Poland. As mentioned above, Radio Moscow also called on “Tuscan patriots to continue the fight side by side with the allies.” If the partisans acted at their own peril and risk, as, for example, in Florence, then they were kept silent about them - just as the Warsaw Uprising, not sanctioned by the Soviet leadership, was kept silent. Thus, the Italian historian G.S. is right. Filatov, who argued that Soviet policy regarding the Italian Resistance had its own clear criteria.

In this light, it is no coincidence that the Soviet press invariably speaks of “occupation”, of the “occupation” of Italian cities by the Allies, and not of their liberation.

The liberation of the capital of Tuscany by partisans, not coordinated with the Anglo-American command, did not fit into the geopolitical scheme of post-fascist Europe that was taking shape at that moment. Let us add that in 1944, Italy’s position in the diplomatic aspect had not yet become clear, since Mussolini’s Italy still existed, albeit as a puppet state of the “Republic of Saló”.

The echoes in the USSR of the events in Central Italy are an additional nuance to the important historiographical problem of the consequences of the Second World War. These echoes show that the fate of post-war Europe was decided not in Yalta in February 1945, but earlier - during military operations in the summer of 1944, when the Red Army was moving towards Germany from the east, and the Anglo-Americans from the west.

World military history in instructive and entertaining examples Kovalevsky Nikolai Fedorovich

Garibaldi and the liberation of Italy

Italy and Ancient Rome

Hero of the national liberation wars of the Italians against Austria in 1840–1860. was Giuseppe Garibaldi. All these years, he called on the oppressed and fragmented Italy to revive the former greatness of the country that once existed in the form of the powerful Ancient Rome. Seeing the passivity of many compatriots, especially the Italian nobility, Garibaldi often complained about the “curse of fallen Ancient Rome,” conquered by the barbarians and leaving Italy “a depraved land, always ready to endure the yoke of the victors.”

Call for true patriots

At the beginning of 1849, the Austrians were expelled from the Roman papal state, where the Roman Republic was created. But she was hated by Pope Pius IX, and the French troops who arrived at his call drove the Garibaldians out of the “eternal city.” Leaving south, Garibaldi addressed his volunteers: “Soldiers! To those of you who wish to follow me, I offer hunger, cold and heat; no rewards, no barracks or supplies, but forced marches and bayonet charges. In a word, whoever loves the Motherland and glory, let him follow me!”

Giuseppe Garibaldi

Why was Garibaldi angry?

In 1859, Garibaldi fought against the Austrians in the ranks of the army of Piedmont (Sardinian Kingdom). The hopes of the Piedmontese king Victor Emmanuel for the help of other Italian kingdoms and duchies were not justified, and Garibaldi was indignant at their indifference and double-dealing. He said of Italian aristocrats: “They are either arrogant or humiliated, but always mean.”

“In order to achieve agreement between Italians,” wrote Garibaldi, “a good stick is needed.”

Farewell words of the French Emperor

In the war of 1859 against Austria, the French Emperor Napoleon III was an ally of the Sardinian Kingdom. His main goal was to take Savoy and Nice from the Austrians in favor of France. Having achieved this, he was hostile to Garibaldi's desire to continue the war. Having learned that he had again begun an armed struggle, Napoleon III exclaimed in his hearts: “If only he got cholera!”

Garibaldi's detachment at the battle of Calatafimi. 1860

Calatafimi - the pride of Garibaldi

The Sardinian king Victor Emmanuel dreamed of uniting all Italian states under his rule, but he was constantly cautious. “I want to threaten, but not act,” the king admitted, fearing Austria and civil war.

Without waiting for the king's help, Garibaldi took action himself in 1860. At the head of a detachment of Alpine shooters (“Thousands”), he landed on the island of Sicily and at Calatafimi defeated the Neapolitan troops, which were three times his size. In his Memoirs, Garibaldi later wrote: “Calatafimi! When I, having survived a hundred battles, take my last breath and my friends see a proud smile on my face, then know that, dying, I remembered you, for there was no more glorious battle.”

Disobedience for the good of Italy

After the liberation of Sicily, Garibaldi decided to march on Naples against Francis II. Victor Emmanuel asked him not to do this, but the idol of the people replied: “When I free the population from oppression, I will lay down my sword at your feet and from that moment I will obey you until the end of my days.”

In September 1860, Garibaldi liquidated the Kingdom of Naples of the Two Sicilies. In March 1861, Victor Emmanuel headed the united Kingdom of Italy.

"Stranger" in his native country

Just as cautious as King Victor Emmanuel was his minister of war and head of government, C. Cavour. Like many around the king, he suspected Garibaldi of being a socialist and more than once showed dissatisfaction with the actions of the leader of the “red shirts.” In 1861, General Garibaldi in the Italian Parliament, in the presence of the Minister of War, undertook not to shake hands with him, declaring: “Cavour has made me a foreigner in Italy!”

Monarchs protect the pope

General Garibaldi had long considered Pope Pius IX, who headed the Roman papal state, to be an accomplice of the Austrians. He called the papal clergy “a black reptile” who corrupted the Italians, “so that we, pacified and fallen into idiocy, would become accustomed to not noticing the whistling of the vine.”

In 1862, Garibaldi marched on Rome without the permission of King Victor Emmanuel. The king, fearing Napoleon III, an ally of the pope, sent regular troops to counter Garibaldi’s “red shirts.” Garibaldi forbade his subordinates to shoot at their compatriots, but an armed clash still occurred in Calabria. The main unifier of Italy was wounded (his right hand, mutilated by a bullet, was saved from amputation by the Russian surgeon N. Pirogov) and voluntarily transferred to the position of a prisoner of the king. A few months later he was forgiven by Victor Emmanuel.

Pope with and without Napoleon

During the Austro-Italian War of 1866, Garibaldi made another attempt to attack the Papal Roman State. As in 1849, French troops arrived to help the pope, driving the Garibaldians away from Rome with the brutal fire of new Chassepot rifled guns. “The Chassepots worked miracles,” reported the French general de Failly to Napoleon III. “The Chasspo pierced my heart as a father and a king,” lamented the Italian King Victor Emmanuel.

Only when Napoleon III lost his throne as a result of the unsuccessful Franco-Prussian War (1870) did Victor Emmanuel decide to occupy the territory of the Roman papal state. The unification of Italy was completed.

Garibaldi and France

Since the autumn of 1870, Garibaldi fought on the side of France, which overthrew Napoleon III, against Prussia. Victor Hugo said in the French parliament: “Not a single king, not a single state has risen to defend France, which has defended the interests of Europe so many times, only one person became an exception - Garibaldi!”

Garibaldi left France, which lost the war to Prussia, in February 1871. He rejected the offer of the leaders of the Paris Commune to lead the military forces of the rebellious Paris: he had already fought with the Italians against the Italians, but he did not want to fight with the French against the French.

White envy of the king

Garibaldi's fame in Italy and abroad was enormous. His trip from the island of Caprera, where he lived, to Rome in 1874 resulted in a huge celebration for the Romans, who greeted the liberator of Italy with delight. “Everything is Garibaldi and Garibaldi,” King Victor Emmanuel joked. “What have I done wrong against the Romans?”

On Garibaldi's grave on the island of Caprera, only his last name is engraved. The grave is crowned by a piece of rock with a star engraved on it - the symbol of the detachment of his “red shirts” - the famous “Thousand”.