Over on the website Il Regno, Giovanni di Napoli has published an excellent review and summary of an essay by Gianandrea de Antonellis entitled “A Concrete Case: Carlism in the Kingdom of Naples.” Di Napoli’s review translates and highlights some of the major points connecting the political tradition of Spanish Carlism to the historical Kingdom of Naples (the mainland possessions of the Kingdom of Sicily). When the call went out from Rome for the support of the Sicilian Kingdom against the piratical invasion and oppression of loyalists following the “unification of Italy” in 1861, veterans of the armies of the Carlist Wars answered the call. Most notable among them were General José Borjes, who lost his life in the conflict, and General Rafael Tristany, who was fated to die in exile far from his Catalonian homeland. De Antonellis highlights four essential pillars of Carlist ideology that also formed the socio-political basis for the Neapolitan Kingdom.

The first of these is Catholicism, as in Di Napoli’s words, “historically essential to Neapolitan identity.” An understanding of religion not only as a guiding principle for political life, but permeating the soil, illuminating and extending outwards the love of the village, from the countryside, through the great institutions of the political realm, and to the community of peoples bound together by a common Faith. Thus as De Antonellis explains,

Importantly, love for one’s homeland does not compete with the patriotism of others. Nationalism, on the other hand, does create rivalry—French vs. Germans, Northern Italians vs. Neapolitans, etc. True patriotism is different: one who loves their homeland sees a kindred spirit in someone who loves theirs, just like someone who deeply loves their own mother respects others who love theirs.

This intertwining of Patriotism and Religion leads naturally to the upholding of both natural and particular rights, which in turn bolster the rule of law against the vicissitudes of purely positivistic regimes. These three principles of Catholicism, patriotism, and localism (Dios, Patria, and Fueros in Carlist parlance) come together in the active defense of the institutions of Legitimate Government. De Antonellis writes of “two aspects” of Legitimacy, “origin and exercise.” These aspects will undoubtedly be familiar to any disciples of the “Austrian School” of Legitimist thought, referenced by Dr. Zeßner-Spitzenberg as legitima institutio and iustitiæ moderatio: lawful institution and the guiding principle of justice.

I would highly recommend di Napoli’s review and translation of “Carlism in the Kingdom of Naples” to readers of this site, as it touches on elements of the Legitimist tradition that I cannot present with the deserved attention in such a short post. Both the review and the article end with a strong rebuke to those who would renounce the Iberian period of Neapolitan history as a sterile backwater devoid of cultural value. On the contrary, the period of Viceroyalty, though troubled in many ways, was a period of great cultural dynamism and advancement, not least in the political tradition that one can rightfully call the crowning achievement of the Western World.