Talk:Expedition of the Thousand

Hey Attilios, it's great that we finally have an article on this. I've copy-edited and made some corrections that I saw fit.

One thing I was wondering about was the degree of British support for the expedition. My understanding has generally been that the British, who were not of course at war with the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, did not openly support the expedition, although they certainly did nothing to stop it, as they easily could have, and covertly helped it along. I also think it would be useful if the French role was brought out more clearly, in particular Napoleon III's decision to allow Piedmontese troops to cross the Papal States, which not only confirmed the victory over Francis II, but also insured the annexation of Umbria and the Marches to the new kingdom of Italy. The causes ought to be gone into more fully, as well, especially the Sicilian unrest that predated Garibaldi's expedition, general Sicilian separatism, the weaknesses and strengths (such as they were) of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, and perhaps a bit more about the situation in northern Italy (French annexation of Nice is important, as I recall, for why Cavour and Victor Emmanuel were eager to send Garibaldi off to Sicily).

More explanation of Cavour's role, in general, would be helpful. Why did he send Garibaldi off to Sicily? Why did he not want him to cross over to the mainland? and so forth. Just some thoughts. It's great, though, to just have a basic narrative of events on the subject and some historiographical analysis. john k 01:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC).

As I can think of no conceivable role for sulphur in building or operating steamships in particular I think access to Sicily to obtain sulphur is unlikely to be enough to get British support for reunification just to help their own steamship trade. Perhaps it was for fumigation and other purposes. Perhaps it should be edditted out as not proven anyway.JDN

Confusing sentence
The article currently says, "The Kingdom of Sardinia, needed a presentable casus belli to attack the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. This was for the state House of Savoy, which however never gave any declaration of war against the Bourbon kingdom, a necessary condition, since, among the requirements presented to Cavour."

There are a few problems with this, not least of which is that the second sentence is actually a sentence fragment. The meaning is also unclear. I hesitate to re-write it because I can think of more than one possible interpretation, and I have no way of deciding which is the intended meaning.

The article appears to be a translation (and I am guessing it is from Italian WP). Could someone more familiar with the subject matter, or fluent in Italian please clarify what is meant here? Revcasy (talk) 12:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Pictures
The foto  is coloriced! Please be as good to write that. If its not noted, thats not serious. --82.192.229.198 (talk) 02:15, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Other confusing sentence
"[…]to the Sicilian bourgeoisie, an independent Sicily as part of the kingdom of Italy[…]" This sounds flatly contradictory: if they wanted to be part of the kingdom of Italy, then they didn't want to be independent. Should it say "autonomous" instead? --Lazar Taxon (talk) 04:42, 26 December 2017 (UTC)