|WikiProject Kingdom of Naples (Inactive)|
|WikiProject Former countries / Italian historical states||(Rated Start-class)|
No idea what the following means:"In the meantime the Jacobine and Republican parties of Naples surged, and the civil war broke out." qp10qp 01:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
This article makes the lazarroni sound like a unified 100% pro monarchist class, which seems very unlikely. Can someone more informed edit the page to clarify this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes. The document that proclaimed the republic also has "Napoletana" and not "Partenopea". The latter term has always been--indeed, still is--widely used as a synonym for Naples. Modern day Neapolitans may even refer to themselves as "Pathenopeans"--Partenope being the original name of the city that later became Naples. It's a very common usage, and many sources refer to the republic as "Partenopea" even though, as you point out, it is not accurate. I am not sure that it is worth correcting--that is, redirecting this article to a renamed article with an explanatory note. Jeffmatt (talk) 06:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't think I've ever heard of the "Neapolitan Republic (Napoleonic)!"
Yes! Isn't the description of the Republic as Napoleonic in the main title a bit of a misnomer, even an anachronism? After all Barras is still in power in France and Bonaparte, as he should be called before the Empire, is way out of the picture in Egypt, isolated from Italian events by Nelson's fleet. It is not till August 1799 that he gets back from Egypt to France by ship and only from September onwards is he becoming a key ruler of France, and the Naples Republic is already well dead. The Parthenopean Republic ran its course without him. Surely it would be better to entitle it: "The Parthenopean Republic of Naples 1799"? Ianahf (talk) 15:23, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
' This article would appear to be well over one hundred years old in its sources and approach. It sounds very much the product of the élitist Whig Macaulayite or even Foxite view of history with its sympathy for French Jacobins and yet thorough fear and dislike of the real people, viz. the treatment of the ordinary Neapolitan people as "Lazzaronis" and the stress on their "burning and massacring" without ever explaining exactly who it was that they were actually fighting and killing. The article remains totally silent on the probable massacres and executions by the other side. After all the French were notorious for carrying portable guillotines in the baggage of their armies. Obviously the French were carrying out a colonial enterprise here and expanding their European empire in a way that would be bound to get up the snout of a people proud of the long history of their own state and highly suspicious of a French expansionist state which was associated with violent hostility to their religious traditions and way of life . This article needs rewriting along the lines of the last century's research and the Meridionalist school today. I'm looking into what the Italians are producing now. Ianahf (talk) 14:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)