The Catholic legacy of Sicily

[alfieb]

Originally, Sicily was the one of the first melting pots of Medieval civilizations. Muslims, Orthodox, Jews, and Catholics... West, East, South of the Mediterranean, they all met in Sicily, where they traded knowledge and goods.

Most of the Muslims were deported to the mainland in the 13th century (the city of Lucera, in Puglia, which was part of the Kingdom of Sicily at the time), and then in the 14th century, under Aragonese rule, the Jews had to mark their clothes with a red wheel and could not marry Catholics (sounds rather Hitlerian, no?). After enduring those restrictions, the Jews were deported en-masse from Sicily by the Spanish in the 15th century. The Orthodox Christians were compelled to become Catholics, and Sicily went from being a mixture of many cultures to, gradually, a monolithic culture (with the limited, isolated exceptions of the Lombard and Albanian villages). Palermo went from one of the largest, richest cities in the world to an average provincial capital, Syracuse went from one of the most important cultural cities in the world to a city of ruins, and we lost our relevance, while we gained a fervent Catholicism due to no other religions being present on the island.

It is often remarked that Sicily is the most Catholic place in Europe, but the early Kingdom of Sicily had certainly been the most liberal. A kingdom who owed its existence to the Vatican in fact became the Vatican's worst enemy in Italy. It had the first modern constitution. It was the first modern absolute monarchy. While the rest of Europe was hellbent on killing the Saracens and the Jews, they were safe in Sicily and didn't have to live in ghettos. (Ghetto is in fact an Italian word, because in Northern Italy, they confined Jews to certain bad neighborhoods and restricted them to certain jobs - for a bit more insight into this, read Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice)

To me, it's a matter of the chicken and the egg. Was Sicily's traditionalism and conservatism caused by its backwardness, or was the backwardness caused by its traditionalism and conservatism? Either way, we were once a land of poets, philosophers, and inventors, and now we are a land of mafia and unemployment. As a fairly traditional Catholic myself, I have to acknowledge, it's quite the shame. The only truly lasting legacies of the old multicultural Sicily are in our cuisine, words of foreign origin in our language, and our varying phenotypes. Most of the architecture in Sicily now more or less resembles other countries from the Spanish Empire, rather than a Greco-Roman or Middle Eastern center of trade.

And in the 150+ years since we became part of Italy? Nothing has changed for the better, in fact, things have only gotten worse. That's why there are more Sicilians living in the diaspora than are living in Italy. That's why there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Sicilians working in Northern Italy. Sicily has one of the richest histories of all the regions of Europe, but it's arguable whether or not it has a future at all.

With a vacancy in the Vatican, traditionally one would have to presume there would be an 'Italian' elected Pope, as had been the case for five hundred consecutive years until John Paul II, as well as most of the Popes before then... but none of the names being mentioned as candidates are Sicilians.

There have been five Sicilian popes in history, and the last one lived in the eighth century. It's hard, as a Catholic Sicilian, to see why Catholicism has been good for us, or we have been good for Catholicism.

[American_Hispanist]

Mexico also has a similar legacy. The Catholic Church also made Mexico very backwards.......

[Sikeliot]

Malta is the most Catholic place in Europe, although either Sicily or Poland would be next for sure.

[alfieb]

Mexico also has a similar legacy. The Catholic Church also made Mexico very backwards.......

In some ways (albeit there are many obvious differences) one could have a hard time telling Sicily and Mexico apart. Very conservative, very strong Catholic morality, a large disparity between the rich and poor, diverse native populations being genetically very different, old, run-down, dirty buildings everywhere, churches dedicated by Spanish kings on just about every street corner, and not to mention the cacti.

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/113/311565006_19d5570e60_z.jpg

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01739/sicily-garden-giul_1739160c.jpg

Could this be Mexico? :lol:

[Sikeliot]

Most of the architecture in Sicily now more or less resembles other countries from the Spanish Empire, rather than a Greco-Roman or Middle Eastern center of trade.

This actually is only true for some places. Parts of western Sicily are architecturally similar to NW Africa.

I actually think Sicily looks more like Tunis or Algiers in terms of the look of the streets and landscape, minus the lack of desert.

[alfieb]

Malta is the most Catholic place in Europe, although either Sicily or Poland would be next for sure.

Don't be too sure of that. The socialist Labour party has won in Malta many times, whereas in Sicily it's always been the right-wing (like Berlusconi) or very Catholic Christian Democrats who won on the island until a few months ago when a strong showing by smaller parties pushed the right out of power and as a result elected a gay communist.

While only about 1/3 of Sicilians still go to mass every Sunday, 92% consider themselves to be practicing Catholics.

[Sikeliot]

If there is one way in which I would feel commonality with Mexicans it's that the Spanish fucked both us and them over historically and should if anything be seen as an oppressor and not a friend.

[alfieb]

Yeah, except for Tlaxcala. They were treated pretty nicely by the Spaniards throughout the colonial period.

[American_Hispanist]

I don't hate the Spanish for putting Mexico in a backward state. The Spanish were also backward but at least the Spanish didn't exterminate indigenous people like the Anglos did.

[alfieb]

I don't hate the Spanish for putting Mexico in a backward state. The Spanish were also backward but at least the Spanish didn't exterminate indigenous people like the Anglos did.
Not in Mexico, maybe. The Tainos of the Caribbean were exterminated by Columbus under the flag of Spain, and other tribes in South America didn't fare well either.

The Spanish first fucked us, then they got tired of Sicily and went after you, and then after Latin America, they went and fucked the Filipinos. :lol:

[Virtuous]

Sorry bro, neither Siciliani nor Polandball got anything on us Maltesers.

[alfieb]

Sorry bro, neither Siciliani nor Polandball got anything on us Maltesers.
Can Malta into Space? Polandball can't. We can.

[Virtuous]

:'|

[RussiaPrussia]

Sicily needs another Hohenstaufer

[alfieb]

Sicily needs another Hohenstaufer
If only, but they died out with Konradin. :(

[American_Hispanist]

Not in Mexico, maybe. The Tainos of the Caribbean were exterminated by Columbus under the flag of Spain, and other tribes in South America didn't fare well either.

The spaniards realized they fucked it up there, and they changed policy when they went into Mexico. for example, when the Spanish were first settling in the Caribbean, they let it free-mans land, but that changed when they were going to Mexico.


The Spanish first fucked us, then they got tired of Sicily and went after you, and then after Latin America, they went and fucked the Filipinos. :lol:

While yes, they did some fuck-ups, I would have rather had the Spanish than the Anglos, which is why I am an Hispanist. Some of the Mexicans here in this forum, can't understand why I would defend the Spanish so much, thanks to the propaganda done by the Mexican government to portray Spaniards in the worst way possible but really, the Spanish did good things.

[alfieb]

The Anglos were assholes, certainly, but at least the territories they colonized are wealthy today. Argentina is the exception to the rule when it comes to the Spanish Empire. All of their other colonies are very poor.

If the Anglos had taken Sicily like they had Malta, who knows. Maybe we'd have lost our language, but we'd have full independence.

[Han Cholo]

The Anglos were assholes, certainly, but at least the territories they colonized are wealthy today. Argentina is the exception to the rule when it comes to the Spanish Empire. All of their other colonies are very poor.

If the Anglos had taken Sicily like they had Malta, who knows. Maybe we'd have lost our language, but we'd have full independence.

Not really. Argentina is a really centralized state in the capital while most of the rest, bar a few exceptions is a desolated, ghetto wasteland similar to any crappy place in Central America. 57% of Argentina doesn't have sewages. Santiago del Estero is one of the worst places, where 86% (almost SSA levels!!) don't have sewages either.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JURD39Wq1E4

[American_Hispanist]

The Anglos were assholes, certainly, but at least the territories they colonized are wealthy today.

well, some of their former colonies are wealthy today, not all, and it's the ones that are mostly euro descendants (USA, Canada, Australia, NZ. South Africa and India are less developed than Mexico)



Argentina is the exception to the rule when it comes to the Spanish Empire. All of their other colonies are very poor.

Argentina is an example of a country that complete fucked up ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING. They went from being 2nd or 3rd wealthiest country in the Western Hemisphere to being in worst economic shape than Mexico. of all the former spanish colonies, the only countries that have potential are Mexico, Chile, and Argentina, but Mexico and Argentina have been completely fucked up by stupid/corrupt politicians (way worse with Argentina). With Chile, they have done some progress but they need to continue with the free-market reforms to become a first rate economic country.


If the Anglos had taken Sicily like they had Malta, who knows. Maybe we'd have lost our language, but we'd have full independence.

If the Anglos would have taken over Mexico, I wouldn't be alive today. It's as simple as that.

[Han Cholo]

If there is one way in which I would feel commonality with Mexicans it's that the Spanish fucked both us and them over historically and should if anything be seen as an oppressor and not a friend.

Is this serious? Mexico is a consequence of Mestizos and Criollos, which in turn are a consequence of Spanish colonization in the area. "Spain" did not fuck Mexico over. Mexico started only when Spanish Viceroyalty was deposed. Before that there was no Mexico.

[alfieb]

Is this serious? Mexico is a consequence of Mestizos and Criollos, which in turn are a consequence of Spanish colonization in the area. "Spain" did not fuck Mexico over. Mexico started only when Spanish Viceroyalty was deposed. Before that there was no Mexico.
Well, since Mexica was the name of the Aztec people, and Mexico City was their capital, that claim is dubious. That's like saying that there was no Sicily before the Romans, because they were the first ones to create a centralized government for the entire island.

[Han Cholo]

Well, since Mexica was the name of the Aztec people, and Mexico City was their capital, that claim is dubious. That's like saying that there was no Sicily before the Romans, because they were the first ones to create a centralized government for the entire island.

Indeed. Which is why I don't feel the name "Mexico" suit me at all, nor at leasdt 75% of the country. Aztec empire did not correspond to modern Mexican borders. Aztec empire does not represent most Mestizos. Aztec empire does not even represent most indigenous people. There is no continuity between Aztec Empire and independent Mexico. When modern Mexico was established Aztec had already been dead for 200 years.

[alfieb]

And the Sicels were a tribe on the East Coast of Sicily. My family is from West/Central Sicily. I am not a Sicel. I live with it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Tribes_of_Sicily_by_11th_century_BC.png

[Sikeliot]

I would wonder if anyone today has much ancestry from the Sikels since the Greeks drove them out of the cities and away from the coast. Maybe people living further inland?

[Vesuvian Sky]

Had a discussion like this before w/ Sik...Spanish influence in S. Italy: seems overstated in importance really. No one in my family ever thinks about this era of S. Italian history. I'm usually more interested in the substantial Greek cultural strata laid down during the Iron Age and my grandma and mom usually acknowledge the contributions of Savoy, and my Grandma the Normans and the role both factions played in Italian history rather then Spanish influence.

[alfieb]

Had a discussion like this before w/ Sik...Spanish influence in S. Italy: seems overstated in importance really. No one in my family ever thinks about this era of S. Italian history. I'm usually more interested in the substantial Greek cultural strata laid down during the Iron Age and my grandma and mom usually acknowledge the contributions of Savoy, and my Grandma the Normans and the role both factions played in Italian history rather then Spanish influence.

No, more that it's understated because it was boring and uneventful on its face, but as I illustrated in the first post, we went from wealthy, Orthodox and multicultural to poor, Latin and Catholic in a very short period of time, and it wasn't the Normans to blame at all.

Naples became the #2 largest city in Europe under the Spanish. Under the Normans and the Swabians, it was just another Greek city in Italy.

[Vesuvian Sky]

No, more that it's understated because it was boring and uneventful on its face, but as I illustrated in the first post, we went from wealthy, Orthodox and multicultural to poor, Latin and Catholic in a very short period of time, and it wasn't the Normans to blame at all.

Naples became the #2 largest city in Europe under the Spanish. Under the Normans and the Swabians, it was just another Greek city in Italy.

But is there really a significant cultural legacy to Spanish influence in S. Italy or is it really just a political thing more?

[Sikeliot]

No southern Italian I know or Sicilian even thinks about Spain to be honest.. those of us who think of ourselves as anything other than plain old Italian think of Greeks, Phoenicians, Arabs, Normans, and Italy.

We don't give a fuck about Spain and rightfully so. They're not in our identity or our psyche. It's always the groups I mentioned above.

[alfieb]

But is there really a significant cultural legacy to Spanish influence in S. Italy or is it really just a political thing more?

They kicked everyone out who wasn't Catholic, they gave Malta away, and ruled us by viceroys for hundreds of years. A negative legacy, but a legacy nonetheless.

It's not a matter of being proud of Spain or admiring the history or whatever, but acknowledging the fact that things changed in Sicily, and in the Kingdom of Naples, in the hundreds of years under Spanish and Aragonese rule.

One significant thing the Spanish were involved with was the Sicilian baroque period. Mostly on the East Coast, though.

[Sikeliot]

I acknowledge the legacy but not as an integral part of our identity or anything we should look at with anything but scorn.

[Vesuvian Sky]

I'm going to chalk the Spanish rule era as simply a political occurence. Nothing more. It never meant much else but truthfully it was never even acknowledged in my family. No deep cultural connection felt here.

[alfieb]

Nor should there be - again, viceroys. The other eras had direct rulers in Palermo, Catania, and/or Naples.

[Sikeliot]

I can feel some kinship to Andalusia because of ancient history but I feel nothing for Castilians. I can relate to Spanish America since their original cultures, too, were destroyed by the Spanish.