Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros43DossierTowards the West. Conflict and Se...

Dossier

Towards the West. Conflict and Settlement in the Maniot Diaspora (17th‑18th Centuries)

Vers l’Ouest : conflits et établissements dans la diaspora maniote (xviiexviiie siècles)
Giampaolo Salice
p. 129-147

Résumés

Cet article analyse l’interaction entre la mobilité méditerranéenne et les politiques de colonisation interne promues par les pays européens à l’époque moderne à travers les événements liés aux migrations des Grecs maniotes des années 1660 aux années 1760. Il s’agit d’une dispersion de population qui s’est propagée de la Méditerranée orientale à celle de l’ouest, avant de s’étendre jusqu’en Amérique du Nord via l’Atlantique. Ce flux migratoire a attiré l’attention de six chancelleries – le Grand-Duché de Toscane, Gênes, les Royaume de Sardaigne, d’Espagne, de Grande-Bretagne et de France – qui ont cherché à le canaliser et à l’intégrer dans leurs projets respectifs de peuplement intérieur. L’article cherche à montrer que ces mobilités humaines étaient non seulement le résultat de politiques de colonisation promues par les chancelleries européennes afin de renforcer la cohésion territoriale de leurs États, mais aussi et surtout le résultat d’initiatives de promotion sociale portées par les migrants eux-mêmes. Ces derniers ont accepté de devenir des colons pour assurer la satisfaction d’objectifs sociaux, politiques et économiques spécifiques, à la fois individuels et communautaires, en ayant recours à la manipulation de l’histoire de leurs propres origines personnelles et familiales.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 Giampaolo Salice (a cura di), La terra ai forestieri, Ospedaletto (Pisa), Pacini, «Percorsi, 16», 2 (...)
  • 2 Edward Cavanagh and Lorenzo Veracini, The Routledge Handbook of the History of Settler Colonialism, (...)

1This article continues a reflection initiated by the author several years ago to address a historiographical issue that has been specifically identified: the relationship between population programmes implemented by European public authorities to populate their respective territorial bodies and the Mediterranean migrations.1 It is a relationship that spans the entire modern era, coinciding with the process that led Europeans to conquer and colonise settlements on other continents.2 We employ the term “internal colonisation” to denote initiatives for settlement and agricultural transformation within European territories. This form of colonisation was principally facilitated by the recruitment of foreign settlers and was designed to populate and “regenerate” regions perceived as peripheral, unproductive, and underdeveloped. In the prevailing perspective, which has become entrenched in historiographical discourse, internal colonisation schemes are seen as outcomes of deliberate reform endeavours initiated by governmental elites, court circuits, and monarchs.

2The exploration of the interplay between internal colonisation and migrations unveils a considerably more intricate reality. In this context, the settlement initiatives involving foreign settlers along the European borders emerge as outcomes of dynamics wherein migrants frequently assumed a pivotal role in terms of planning, negotiation, and the establishment of new colonies.

  • 3 Olga Katsiardi‑Hering, “The Greek Diaspora: Its Geography and Typology”, in Spyros I. Asdrachas (ed (...)

3This article aims to elucidate that such protagonism constitutes a crucial element in understanding the extensive and intricate diasporic dispersion of the Maniots, a Greek subgroup traditionally inhabiting the Mani peninsula, which forms a vital element within the larger phenomenon of the Greek diaspora.3 Maniot migration unfolded between the 1660s and the latter half of the subsequent century. This period marked a century of mobility and continual resettlements, during which Maniots engaged in negotiations for settlement plans with numerous European governments, ranging from the Grand Duchy of Tuscany and the Republic of Genoa to the Kingdom of Sardinia, Spain, as well as Britain and France. The dynamism observed can only be elucidated through an examination of the internal dynamics within the migrant community, coupled with an exploration of the conflicts and genealogical‑patrimonial reproduction strategies pursued by the families constituting it. This case study is particularly intriguing as it allows us to delve into the history of human mobility and its profound impact on the shaping of modern Europe. It demonstrates that the evolution of Europe was not solely dictated by governmental demographic policies; rather, in specific instances, it was predominantly influenced by ambitious and bottom-up plans for emancipation and greatness conceived within migrant communities.

Tuscan‑Genovese background

4In 1675, around 700 individuals embarked on a French ship anchored in the harbour of Oitylo on the Mani Peninsula, setting course for the Tyrrhenian Sea. This noteworthy migration was both preceded and succeeded by numerous other departures involving individuals or small groups compelled to abandon their homeland for a fresh start in the Western regions. These migratory movements extended through the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily before reaching Tuscany and Genoese Corsica. On occasion, the migrants faced interception and capture by Muslim corsairs, who subjected them to enslavement, transporting them to destinations such as Tunis, Algiers and other North African ports, initiating harrowing experiences and dramatic wanderings.

  • 4 Gioacchino Cambiagi, Istoria del regno di Corsica scritta dall’abate Giovacchino Cambiagi fiorentin (...)
  • 5 Themes strikingly similar to those employed by the Greek‑Albanians who sought permission in 1580 to (...)
  • 6 J. M. Wagstaff, “House Types as an Index in Settlement Study: A Case Study from Greece”, Transactio (...)

5For centuries, scholars have deliberated on the motivations that impelled the Maniots to embark on their journeys.4 Descendants of the migrants frequently allude to the imperative to escape the oppression of the Turks, underscoring themes of cruelty, religious intolerance and oppressive governance. These recurrent motifs form a narrative leitmotif, commonly employed by Levantine Christians seeking refuge in Christian territories.5 Nevertheless, the historical reality appears to be more intricate. As Ottoman armies extended their influence into the Balkans, they systematically replaced local ruling groups affiliated with preceding dominions, opting for individuals deemed more reliable and assimilable into the Ottoman system of governance. The erosion of social prestige and political prominence, intricately tied to economic and fiscal preservation, compelled the leading Greek‑Maniot families to search for alternative spaces where they could restore their diminished authority. New settlements arose in the Morea itself following the migration of entire clans due to local power struggles.6

6These migrations swiftly transcended the confines of the Hellenic world, becoming the subject of discussions that Maniot clan leaders engaged in with foreign governments expressing interest in accommodating them. The negotiating process of these intermediaries hinged on their capacity to mobilise valuable human capital. Not every migrant found a warm reception, as governments sought individuals capable of cultivating the land, constructing buildings, defending the territory and upholding the king’s honour with arms. Hence, the migration cohorts included fallen nobles alongside farmer‑soldiers, craftsmen, merchants, shipowners, fishermen and priests. It was not merely about securing bargaining power; in the aspirations of the migrant leadership, the establishment of the colony aligned with the recreation of the land they had been compelled to abandon, along with its internal social structures and hierarchies.

7Such a dynamic is clear in the migration that led several hundred Maniots to settle both in the Grand Duchy of Tuscany and in Genoese Corsica.7 The exiles were Orthodox Christians. Before settling, they swore obedience to the Roman pope. In both Tuscany and Corsica, Propaganda Fide sent its own visitor to ensure the conversion of the colonists was genuine. The Maniot presence in Tuscany was very short‑lived.8 The fate of the Maniots established in Corsica was different. The colony of Paomia, spread across the three inhabited centres of Paomia, Salogna and Redonda, located on the western coast of the island, on a highland area not far from the sea, grew rapidly. By the early 18th century, the community had become a significant demographic and agricultural reality.

Settlement of memories

  • 9 Marie‑Anne Comnène, Cargèse, une colonie grecque en Corse, Paris, les Belles lettres, 1959.
  • 10 William Miller, “Greece under the Turks, 1571‑1684”, English Historical Review, vol. 19, no 76, 190 (...)
  • 11 Carlo Botta, Storia d’Italia: 1660‑1789, vol. ii, part ii (1660‑1789), Firenze, Tipografia Borghi e (...)
  • 12 Ibid. supra, p. 683‑685.

8The narrative of the Maniot colony in Corsica has been shaped by the Stefanopoli family. It represents a “constructed” history, a propagandistic rendition of the foundation of Paomia that evolved over time, crafted to assert, legitimise and defend the family’s prerogatives,9 affecting following historiographical works on the Maniots of Corsica.10 However, even Carlo Botta, who was among the historians who contributed most to disseminating that “history”, warned his readers that it resulted from an interweaving of “comments and fables.11” This narrative portrayed the Stefanopolis as a lineage related to the Byzantine emperors, depicted the Maniots as direct descendants of mythical Spartans and attributed solely to the Stefanopolis the credit for planning, negotiating and leading the migration that in the 17th century had brought those people “harsh and wild”, “devoted to revenge” and motivated by “love of their homeland”, from the port of Oitylo to Genoese Corsica to establish Paomia.12

  • 13 “Demetrio Stefano, and Anastasio Medici/Itriani were the names of the three negotiators with Genoa (...)
  • 14 On the negotiations that led to the founding of Paomia in Corsica see Giampaolo Salice, «“Per venir (...)

9The Itriani/Medici, those who, according to the documentary sources we consulted, were the real negotiators of the Maniot migrations in the 17th century,13 both to the Grand Duchy of Tuscany and Corsica, were instead portrayed as violent enemies and vindictive against the Stefanopolis, or at most, as supporting characters.14

  • 15 ASGE, Corsica, 934, Giovanni Stefanopoli to the Senate of Genoa, 7 October 1695.
  • 16 ASGE, Corsica, 933, n.n. The document is undated but can be attributed to December 1731 or January  (...)

10The production of a memory subservient to the interests of the Stefanopolis began immediately after the foundation of Paomia and over time it became a tool that various branches of the family used to conquer, maintain and enhance a prominent social and political position within and outside the colony. Just to give a few examples, in the request that Giovanni Stefanopoli sent to the Genoese Senate for a tax exemption and the management of the Sagona tower, he claimed to have been “one of the four privileged leaders who led the people from Braccio di Maina to Genoa”.15 When, in the early 1730s, the priest Giuseppe Maria Stefanopoli asked Cardinal Giorgio Spinola to intercede with the Genoese authorities to appoint him as the new chaplain of Paomia, he declared not only to have studied at the Pontifical College of St. Anastasius in Rome and to have taught grammar in Greek and Latin to about thirty children from his homeland, but above all to be the great‑grandson of two of the four leaders who, about seventy years earlier, had led the Greeks to Corsica.16

  • 17 ASGE, Corsica, 943. Letter from Zakynthos dated 22 September 1677, from Michele Cozifachi Stefanopo (...)
  • 18 ASGE, Corsica, 943. Letter from Genoa dated 30 September 1678, from Francesco Maria da Chios to Teo (...)

11Even if the Stefanopolis did not negotiate the initial agreements for the establishment of Paomia, they played a decisive role in the years of consolidating the colony. Starting in 1677, they initiated a second Maniot migration to Corsica, which brought their entire clan, who had sought refuge on the Venetian Island of Zante after the Ottoman conquest of Crete. Giovanni and Michele Stefanopoli were active in Genoa, convincing the senate to authorise and finance the transportation to Corsica of their compatriots waiting in Zante and other relatives in the Morea. Other members of the Stefanopoli clan operated in the same years in Venice to overcome the prohibition on departure pronounced by the governor of Zante.17 The negotiations lasted for almost two years. A Capuchin friar named Giovanni Maria da Chios, who worked for the Stefanopolis as a translator, played a role in these negotiations, assisting them in defining the logistics of migration: from agreements with the shipowners to those with the various courts interested in the deal, not only Genoa and Venice but also France.18

12In the public memory produced in the subsequent years, the second migration was confused with the first, thereby transforming the Stefanopolis into the first founders of Paomia. The manipulation of history continued in the decades and centuries that followed,19 sometimes resisting the evidence of the archival documentation consulted.20 In the 19th century, the need to ennoble the deeds and lineage of the Stefanopolis even led to the production of false genealogies to prove the relationship between the Stefanopolis and Napoleon Bonaparte.21 In the petition presented to the French Chamber of Deputies by Nicolas Stefanopoli in 1842, the Maniots of Cargese were presented as direct descendants of the Spartans, and Michele and Costantino Stefanopoli were equated with Pericles for the municipal reforms with which the two supposedly transformed Ajaccio into one of the most important port cities in Corsica and France.22

13Human events – especially family ones – are often marked by such fabrications. It is ultimately a symptom of an insecure leadership, continually contested. By following the thread of these contestations, we find the internal divisions within the community of Maniots who migrated to Corsica, which, from their first settlement, played a decisive role in shaping the colony’s choices, especially in moments of maximum political and social crisis that it would have to endure.

A challenged leadership

  • 23 Partenio claimed to have been consecrated as a bishop in the diocese of Morea by the metropolitan o (...)
  • 24 ASGE, Corsica, 643. Partenio and Apostoli Stefanopoli to the Genoese Senate from Paomia, 27 March 1 (...)

14From its foundation, Paomia had been governed in civil matters by a director, subordinate to the Magistracy of Corsica. In spiritual affairs, the colony was initially entrusted to Bishop Partenio, who arrived from Oitylo with the first migration.23 In agreement with the Holy See, the Genoese authorities kept the prelate in his role, so as not to unsettle the minds of the colonists and to make the absorption of the Orthodox into the Latin Church more gradual. In March 1679, Odorisio Pieri, the apostolic visitor of Propaganda Fide sent from Rome, reached Paomia. Partenio acquiesced to the instructions conveyed by the Catholic missionary. Nevertheless, in communications dispatched to Genoa, Partenio lamented his inability to fulfil his duties as a bishop, as stipulated in the settlement pacts. The primary obstacle to this was the colony’s director, who obstructed him from ordaining new Greek priests, primarily to avert reactions from Rome.24

  • 25 ASGE, Corsica 943. Dispatch to the Senate from Paomia dated 13 December 1768.
  • 26 In the 18th century, following the destruction of Paomia by Corsican rebels and the migration of th (...)

15By 1678, the conflict between the two had escalated to the point where Partenio, supported by Apostoli and Giovanni Stefanopoli, associated the director to the hated Turk and wrote: “We have spent so much time with the Turk, and they have upheld every commitment they made, and here we see that many things have been lacking.”25 These were the first signs of a confusion of powers and responsibilities that would lead to repeated clashes between the director and the colonists and between the director and the Propaganda Fide visitor.26 Conflict also simmered within the community due to disputes among the chief families.

  • 27 ASGE, Corsica 934. Letter from the colony leaders to the Genoese Senate, 25 March 1699.
  • 28 Teodoro Busachj, Giorgio Stefanopoli, Teodoro Covona, Piero Stefanopoli, Michele Mundano, Calapotto (...)

16Paomia was led by ten chiefs. Each of them was responsible for a certain number of families. Collectively they represented the entire colony, form its council, and decide, sometimes with the director’s involvement, on matters within their competence, as practiced in other communities in the Corsican kingdom. However, Paomia had “some particular prerogatives admitted by the concession or permission of the prince and established by inveterate custom” since four of the ten chiefs enjoyed special privileges as representatives of the four “noble” lineages. Such structure was designed to harmonise the houses’ interests and avoid excessive concentrations of power. However, as early as March 1699, some families tried to establish themselves as undisputed community leaders. The conflict erupted immediately.27 Nine of the ten chiefs of Paomia, “on behalf of this community”, turned to the Genoese Senate to denounce “chief Giovanni Stefanopoli”, accusing him of being the “cause of the evils and disturbances”.28 After being invested with the “capato”, instead of becoming “agreeable and faithful [...] he becomes difficult and presumptuous” and demands submission from others “and this is the cause of many disorders”. Stefanopoli was also accused of inciting the monks “to new riots”, “supporting bandits”, smuggling grain and other goods, and writing letters to the senate on behalf of a community unaware of his machinations. Among the signatories of the complaint there were several Stefanopolis, demonstrating that conflict was able to break the unity of families and clans bearing the same surname.

  • 29 Emiliano Beri, Genova e il suo regno: ordinamenti militari, poteri locali e controllo del Territori (...)
  • 30 ASGE, Corsica 935, Letter to the Genoese Senate, 17 September 1744.

17Internal conflicts would mark the entire history of Paomia. The conflict intensified from the 1730s, with the outbreak of anti‑Genoese riots in Corsica, that would mark the entire century. The Maniots sided with Genoa, and the rebellious Corsicans responded by destroying the inhabited centres of Paomia. The Maniots had to take refuge in Ajaccio, protected and assisted by the Genoese authorities. In 1731, the Greeks were militarily organised into three companies, which the Republic deployed against the Corsican rebels.29 The companies were reestablished, taking care to uphold the hierarchies and balances among the factions and clans of the Maniot community. A first company was assigned to Giorgio Stefanopoli, who, upon his death, wanted his role to go to his son Micaglia. However, in 1744, following the demise of Giovanni, the head of the Busacci Stefanopoli faction and captain of the second Greek company, his position was taken over by Teodoro, the second son of the aforementioned Giorgio Stefanopoli, who led a different faction.30

  • 31 ASGE, Corsica 935, Letter from Teodoro Stefanopoli to the Genoese Senate, 3 February 1745.

18The decision, enacted by the general commissioner in Ajaccio, Stefano Veneroso, disrupted the equilibrium among military companies and factions within the colony. It diminished the influence of the Busacci Stefanopoli branch, posed challenges for the Cassaràs, who, with Lieutenant Teodoro, were expected to assume leadership of the company, and consolidated authority within the heirs of the Giorgio Stefanopoli clan (see fig. 1). The divergence became more pronounced in 1745 when Micaglia’s son, Georgios‑Maria, sought appointment as the major of the Greeks.31

  • 32 Michel Stephanopoli de Comnène, Histoire des Grecs‑Maniotes en Corse, vol. ii : Ajaccio, 1731‑1775, (...)

19Between 1752 and 1756, the Busacci Stefanopoli faction, under the leadership of Costantino, sought to form a regiment by enlisting Greco‑Corsican troops with the support of the French government. This initiative stirred the opposition of the Genoese government and prompted protests from Captain Giorgio‑Maria Stefanopoli. The schism between the two factions reflects the intricate diplomatic dynamics between the Republic of Genoa and the Kingdom of France. While Costantino guided the Greeks towards the latter, Giorgio consistently gained favour with Genoa. The control of the Greek colony hung in the balance.32

20However, the Busacci Stefanopoli and the Cassarà factions appeared to lack sufficient strength to hinder the consolidation of power within the Micaglia Stefanopoli wing. This weakness led some of them to seek an escape route, opening negotiations with foreign courts interested in receiving them. Once again, members of the leading Maniot families, competing with each other, negotiated new migrations to the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, the Kingdom of Sardinia, the Kingdom of Spain and British domains like Minorca or Florida. As in the past, migration became an opportunity to polarise the colony around oneself and exploit its bargaining potential to gain personal and family, economic, social, and political advantages and to regenerate elsewhere the threatened position of pre‑eminence due to internal strife and international affairs.

Disputes and migrations

  • 33 Archivio di Stato di Torino (ASTO), Corte, Paesi, Sardegna, Feudi, mazzo 23, n.n. For more details, (...)
  • 34 Perhaps this episode is related to the trial that concluded with a final judgment on 22 July 1739, (...)

21Among the early members of the Cassarà faction seeking new land outside of Corsica was Giovanni Mundano, a member of one of the four privileged families of Paomia and a standard‑bearer in the same military company as Lieutenant Teodoro Cassarà. In 1733, Giovanni disembarked in the north of Sardinia with around ten Greco‑Corsicans and sought an audience with the Sardinian viceroy to initiate negotiations for the migration of approximately 200 families.33 Only Mundano revealed his name to the government delegate. The others, his fellow countrymen, chose not to do so since they had left Corsica without the authorisation of the Genoese government and were therefore considered deserters. Upon learning of Mundano’s attempt, Genoa intercepted the negotiation and made the Greco‑Corsicans to return to Corsica.34

  • 35 Arxiu Històric de Maó (AHM), Universitat, 390, n.n., Plea of the Greek merchants of Mahon to the vi (...)

22About ten years later, another member of the same faction as Mundano made another attempt. His name was Giorgio Cassarà. He was a Greek‑Catholic priest from Ajaccio. In 1743, Giorgio deserted, illegally leaving Corsica aboard a schooner flying the British flag, owned by some Greek merchants. He had accepted an invitation to become the priest of the growing Orthodox colony in Mahon, the capital of Minorca, which was then a British possession.35 As a Greek‑Catholic priest, Cassarà was subject to the bishop of Ajaccio and the Latin Church. However, he had left Corsica without informing his diocesan superior. In the eyes of the Anglo‑Greeks, Cassarà was supposed to be the pawn used to encourage the entire Paomia colony to migrate to Minorca.

23Nevertheless, Cassarà was not just a pawn. Between 1744 and 1745, he travelled between London and Mahon, carrying with him the correspondence of the Greeks already established in Menorca with the British government, engaging in dialogue with the Russian ambassador in London, who was interested in promoting the establishment of a new Orthodox Church.36 Cassarà conveyed to the governor and the Greeks of Minorca the news that the British government had finally authorised the building of an Orthodox church and cemetery, where the exercise of religion would be free from Roman interference.37 With this decision, King George’s government hoped to attract as many Greeks as possible to strengthen the British presence in Levantine markets.

24Thanks to Cassarà, news of the impending establishment of the Greek colony in Minorca rapidly disseminated to Corsica. Approximately forty Greco‑Corsican families, spurred by the political‑military crisis engulfing the island, internal conflicts within the Maniot colony and the influence of the Cassaràs, opted to migrate to Minorca.

  • 38 ASTO, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5, Capitoli che il prete Giorgio Cassara ha pre (...)
  • 39 Archivio di Stato di Cagliari (ASCA), Regio Demanio, categoria iv, Feudi, vol. 12, Capitoli sovra i (...)
  • 40 ASTO, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5, Capitoli sopra il progetto per lo stabilimen (...)
  • 41 Giampaolo Salice, Colonizzazione sabauda e diaspora greca, Viterbo, Sette Città, «Biblioteca, Serie (...)

25That was the climax of Cassarà’s work. Eventually, he was not allowed to settle in Minorca. As a Greek‑Catholic priest, he was no longer welcome in a colony that had decided to embrace Orthodoxy, free from any dependence on the Church of Rome. Thus, Cassarà entered into a new, long and complex negotiation with the King of Sardinia, which resulted in three capitulations: those of 3 October 174638 and 25 April 1750,39 to move several thousand Maniots from the Peloponnese to Sardinia, and that of 2 April 1751,40 to bring the Greeks from Corsica to Sardinia. However, this second ambitious initiative by Cassarà failed for various reasons, including the political weakness and administrative inadequacy of the House of Savoy, opposition from Sardinian elites and Pope Benedict XIV’s opposition to the transfer of thousands of Orthodox individuals to Sardinia.41

  • 42 ASTO, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5. The list of beneficiaries can be found publi (...)
  • 43 ASTO, Sezioni Riunite, Ufficio generale delle finanze, Prima Archiviazione, Sardegna, mazzo 5.
  • 44 ASCA, Segreteria di Stato, ii serie, vol. 1289, Risoluzione del signor Intendente generale conte di (...)

26Moreover, the activism of the Stefanopoli enemy faction undermined Cassarà’s projects. Since Genoa had granted the Greco‑Corsicans permission to emigrate in 1753, other branches of the Stefanopoli family had engaged in negotiations with foreign countries to planes migration and settlement, aiming to maintain control over the colony or gain a better social and economic position, or both. On the same day that Cassarà signed the last of the three mentioned capitulations, the Sardinian government signed a fourth, assigning 38 plots of land in the historical region of Nurra to as many Greco‑Corsican families led by Demetrio Paterazzi Stefanopoli.42 Also, in 1751, King Charles Emmanuel III of Sardinia promulgated the royal charter founding the Greek colony of San Cristoforo di Montresta,43 which would be the destination for the Maniot families from Corsica led by Domenico Stefanopoli, Giovanni Smirnaci and the brothers Demetrio Stefanopoli and Panioto Pataraci. The latter, a year after the settlement, requested appropriate compensation from the Sardinian authorities “for their alleged work as leaders in bringing the others to this kingdom”.44

  • 45 ASTO, Corte, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5, Capitoli concordati con li Capitano C (...)
  • 46 Captain Costantino Stefanopoli, Lieutenant Elia Cassarà, Panioto Castellacci, Nicolò Garidacci and (...)
  • 47 ASCA, Segreteria di Stato, ii serie, vol. 1289.
  • 48 Indeed, in 1754 twenty‑two Greek Corsican families petitioned to join those destined for Sant’Antio (...)

27In 1754, a new agreement was signed in Turin. Among the signatories was another Cassarà, Elia, who, along with Costantino Stefanopoli, reached a deal with the king of Sardinia to transfer hundreds of Maniot families from Corsica to the Sardinian Island of Sant’Antioco.45 The document had to be ratified by the five men chosen by the Greco‑Corsican families willing to migrate as their procurators. However, when the agreement was discussed in Ajaccio, two of the five delegates refused to sign it, considering Sant’Antioco too small.46 Moreover, during the same meeting, a letter was written to the Sardinian government stating that Cassarà’s signature on the 1754 agreements was forged. At the time of the signing, Cassarà was not in Turin but in Mahon, Minorca,47 trying to convince the Maniot families that had moved there to join those destined for Sant’Antioco.48

  • 49 These are the families that refused to renounce their obedience to Rome to convert to Orthodoxy and (...)
  • 50 ASCA, Segreteria di Stato, ii serie, vol. 1289.

28The forged signature angered the Sardinian government, which decided to overlook it. Meanwhile, Cassarà in Minorca convinced 22 Maniot families, about 75 people, to leave Mahon and migrate to Sant’Antioco, based on the previously signed agreements.49 The Sardinian authorities, according to previous royal directives, should have settled them in Montresta, the other Greek colony forming in the northern part of the kingdom. However, the 75 refugees agreed only to go to Sant’Antioco to join their relatives “in the closest kinship”.50 Nevertheless, disputes over the destination of Sant’Antioco led to the failure of the endeavour, and most of the Maniots returned to Corsica.

  • 51 Ambrogio Rossi, Osservazioni storiche sopra la Corsica, Livre XII, 1769‑1775, Lucien Auguste Letter (...)
  • 52 APF, Italo‑Greci, busta 4 (1741‑1760), c. 351. Letter from Archbishop Francesco Guidi to the pope, (...)
  • 53 Miguel Avilés Fernández and Guillermo Sena Medina (eds), Carlos III y las «Nuevas Poblaciones», [ac (...)
  • 54 Archivo Histórico Nacional, Archivo Histórico de la Nobleza, Diversos, Priego, C.16, D.44.

29Upon landing in Ajaccio, the leaders of the Busacci‑Cassarà faction did not relent. They actively pursued and established communication with the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, proposing to settle in the Pisan Maremma. The Tuscan regency did not agree, instead offering lands in the territory of Sovana and Populonia.51 The Maniots rejected the counterproposal, “so many went to Minorca”.52 The frenetic search for new land to settle, constant movement, and family dispersion demonstrate the determination of a part of the Greek‑Maniot leadership to evade the control of the faction led by Giorgio Maria Stefanopoli, who knew well that his power depended mainly on the ability to maintain control over the colony. For this reason, he worked to provide an alternative to his compatriots by negotiating with the Spanish government to include the Greco‑Corsicans in the extensive Nuevas Poblaciones programme initiated by King Charles III of Spain for the Sierra Morena.53 The provision by which the Spanish monarch planned to populate towns in Malaga and Almeria with a colony of Greeks from the island of Corsica dated back to 1 May 176854.

  • 55 Giampaolo Salice, Il mare degli altri: Colonie di popolamento del Regno di Sardegna (xviii secolo), (...)
  • 56 E.P. Panagopoulos, The Background of the Greek Settlers…, op. cit.

30A few days later, on 6 June, Lieutenant Elia Cassarà returned. He leaded 20 Greco‑Corsican families, about 61 people, to the island of Asinara in Sardinia. He had just signed agreements with the Marseille entrepreneur Joseph Joachim Velixandre, who had been granted the island by the Sardinian government.55 This Sardinian attempt also failed, and Cassarà’s faction was once again forced to return to Ajaccio. In this situation of great uncertainty, some Greco‑Corsicans decided to respond to the call of a Scottish doctor, Andrew Turnbull, who was gathering Greek settlers to transport them to Florida to establish a New Smyrna.56

  • 57 Archivo General de Simancas (AGS), Secretaría y Superintendencia de Hacienda (SSH), 497, f. 39.
  • 58 The negotiation is described in Ambrogio Rossi, Osservazioni storiche…, op. cit., p. 306‑307.

31Meanwhile, in Ajaccio, Giorgio Maria Stefanopoli continued negotiating with the Spanish government. In March 1770, he obtained ten thousand Genoese liras to finance the emigration of his people to Spain.57 Departure seemed imminent, but in the two years of negotiation, Giorgio Maria had also played another negotiating table to try to achieve the most desired outcome for all the Maniots: the regaining of the lands of Paomia and the founding of a new Greek village there, but closer to the sea, in the region called Cargese, protected by the eponymous coastal tower. It was an objective that became possible between 1768 and 1770 when Corsica came under French control. The Count of Marbeuf, the future military governor of Corsica, managed the transition. He had no intention of leaving the significant human and military capital of the Greco‑Corsicans to Spain. Marbeuf listened to Stefanopoli’s requests, who informed him of the excellent conditions obtained from Spain, and decided to grant Stefanopoli’s requests.58 This laid the groundwork for the establishment of the new Greek village of Cargese, which ultimately became a focal point for all Greco‑Corsicans still dispersed in the 1770s. Giorgio‑Maria’s faction emerged triumphant from this challenging circumstance, securing government support for the colony and favourable conditions for the leader of the new settlement.

Conclusions

32We have endeavoured to narrate the events of a migratory flow spanning from the 1660s to the 1770s, traversing the eastern Mediterranean to the western and eventually reaching North America across the Atlantic. Six chancelleries, namely the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, Genoa, the Kingdom of Sardinia, the Kingdom of Spain, Britain and France, sought to intercept and utilise this flow in their respective resettlement and internal colonisation plans.

33However, the explanation for these human movements goes beyond the mere outcomes of colonisation policies devised by European chancelleries to fortify the territorial body of their states. As we have sought to demonstrate, the driving force behind these migrations originated from the migrants themselves. They embraced the role of colonists only when the combination of migration and colonisation ensured the fulfilment of specific social, political and economic objectives, both individual and communal.

34The leaders of the migrants managed negotiations, proposed conditions to governments and, in collaboration with sovereign delegates, formulated rules defining the political and fiscal profile of the settlements they would inhabit. Their objective was to secure a privileged and socially prominent position in the foreign world they were establishing for themselves and their descendants.

35In this context, migration transcended the mere relocation of individuals, women and families. It set in motion recruitment and settlement strategies for populations, models of settlement, forms of habitation, plans for spatial restructuring, norms governing new communities and regulations for civil, political and spiritual life. The documentation stemming from the Maniot diaspora is replete with references to other colonisation experiences involving Greeks, which have left indelible marks on the history and territory of early modern Europe.

36In conclusion, Maniot migration connected historiographically distinct and distant spaces, such as Tuscany and Sardinia, Minorca, Corsica and Florida. It allows us to bridge individual and collective perspectives on the history of migrations, the private and public spheres, genealogical‑patrimonial family reproduction strategies with those of state power and early global empires, and the strategic‑military domain with the spiritual one. Our analytical focus shifts continuously from a close examination to a broader perspective. The materials from the Maniot diaspora are so rich that there is still much they can reveal. The overarching question remains whether the Maniots’ story, summarised in this essay, was entirely exceptional or if it signifies more widely distributed dynamics that can also be identified in other migration and resettlement spaces for foreigners.

Figure 1: Factions in the community of Paomia

Figure 1: Factions in the community of Paomia
Haut de page

Notes

1 Giampaolo Salice (a cura di), La terra ai forestieri, Ospedaletto (Pisa), Pacini, «Percorsi, 16», 2019. On the great Euro‑Mediterranean diasporas, see also Mathilde Monge and Natalia Muchnik (eds), Early Modern Diasporas: A European History, London/New York, Routledge, “Studies in Early Modern religions dissents and radicalism”, 2022.

2 Edward Cavanagh and Lorenzo Veracini, The Routledge Handbook of the History of Settler Colonialism, Abingdon/New York, Routledge, “Routledge history handbooks”, 2017 [2015].

3 Olga Katsiardi‑Hering, “The Greek Diaspora: Its Geography and Typology”, in Spyros I. Asdrachas (ed.), Greek Economic History: 15th‑19th Centuries, vol. i, Athens, Piraeus Group Bank Cultural Foundation, 2007, p. 226‑235; Angela Falcetta, Ortodossi nel Mediterraneo cattolico: frontiere, reti, comunità nel Regno di Napoli (1700‑1821), Roma, Viella, 2016; Mathieu Grenet, La fabrique communautaire : les Grecs à Venise, Livourne et Marseille, 1770‑1840, Rome, École française de Rome, « Collection de l’École française de Rome, 521, Mondes méditerranéens et balkaniques, 9 », 2016, <10.4000/books.efa.9000>.

4 Gioacchino Cambiagi, Istoria del regno di Corsica scritta dall’abate Giovacchino Cambiagi fiorentino. Arricchita di dissertazioni, documenti, bolle, annotazioni ecc. Tomo primo. [-quarto.] [...]: Tomo secondo contenente le cose occorse dal 1553. fino al 1725 [...], 4 vols, 1770‑1772; Dimo Stephanopoli de Comnène, Voyage de Dimo et Nicolo Stephanopoli en Grèce, pendant les années v et vi (1797 et 1798 v. st.), [...] d’après deux missions, dont l’une du Gouvernement français, et l’autre du général en chef Buonaparte, vol. i, Paris, Imp. de Guilleminet, 1799, <https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k853568>; Nicolaos Stéphanopoli de Comnène, Histoire de la colonie grecque établie en Corse, accompagnée de réflexions politiques sur l’état actuel de la Grèce, et d’un court aperçu sur la Corse, où l’on indique les moyens employés pour améliorer le sort des habitants de cette île, Paris, A. Thoisnier‑Desplaces, 1826; Nikolaos Stephanopulos de Comnène, Génie des colonies grecques, spartiates et peuple indigène de la Corse, Paris, L. Mathias, 1843, <https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb10447091?page=7>.

5 Themes strikingly similar to those employed by the Greek‑Albanians who sought permission in 1580 to establish settlements in the lands of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany. See Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Mediceo del principato, fascicle 4279, f. 20.

6 J. M. Wagstaff, “House Types as an Index in Settlement Study: A Case Study from Greece”, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, no 37, 1965, p. 69‑75, <https://doi.org/10.2307/621690>.

7 Doriana Popova Dell’Agata, “Greci e slavi in alcuni tentativi popolazionistici dei primi granduchi di Toscana”, Europa Orientalis, no 8‑(Contributi italiani al vi Congresso internazionale di Studi Sud‑Est Europa), 1989, p. 105‑115, <http://www.europaorientalis.it/uploads/files/1989/1989.6.pdf>; Antonio Stopani, « L’établissement des colonies étrangères dans le Grand Duché de Toscane au xvie siècle : premières notes d’une recherche en cours », in Claudia Moatti (dir.), Mobilité des personnes en Méditerranée de l’antiquité à l’époque moderne : procédures de contrôle et documents d’identification, Rome, École française de Rome, « École française de Rome, 341 », 2004, p. 425‑541, <https://www.persee.fr/doc/efr_0223-5099_2004_act_341_1_11460>; Giampaolo Salice, « Diaspore greche e colonizzazione interna nella Toscana granducale (xvixvii secolo) », Giampaolo Salice (a c. di), La terra ai forestieri, Ospedaletto (Pisa), Pacini, «Percorsi, 16», 2019, p. 101‑127, <https://iris.unica.it/bitstream/11584/270640/1/Diaspore%20greche%20e%20colonizzazione%20interna%20nella%20Toscana%20granducale%20%28secoli%20XVI-XVII%29.pdf>.

8 Giampaolo Salice, “Diaspore greche e colonizzazione…”, op. cit. supra.

9 Marie‑Anne Comnène, Cargèse, une colonie grecque en Corse, Paris, les Belles lettres, 1959.

10 William Miller, “Greece under the Turks, 1571‑1684”, English Historical Review, vol. 19, no 76, 1904, p. 646‑668, <https://www.jstor.org/stable/548610>; E. P. Panagopoulos, “The Background of the Greek Settlers in the New Smyrna Colony”, Florida Historical Quarterly, vol. 35, no 2, 1956, p. 95‑115, <https://www.jstor.org/stable/30139009>; Nick Nicholas, “A History of the Greek Colony of Corsica”, Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 31, no 1, 2005, p. 33‑78, <https://scholarship.tricolib.brynmawr.edu/bitstreams/908a79d9-3dbc-4564-9bd6-948b2359b635/download>.

11 Carlo Botta, Storia d’Italia: 1660‑1789, vol. ii, part ii (1660‑1789), Firenze, Tipografia Borghi e compagni, 1835, p. 683.

12 Ibid. supra, p. 683‑685.

13 “Demetrio Stefano, and Anastasio Medici/Itriani were the names of the three negotiators with Genoa for the agreements signed in 1663 and then revised in 1671. Article 13 of the 1671 agreements states that “Demetrio Medici, his son Stefano, and his grandson Anastasio, who negotiate the matter, should retain some privilege in memory of being the authors of this introduction, at the discretion of the Most Serene College”. Archivio di Stato di Genova (ASGE), Corsica, 935, s.n. As we have pointed out elsewhere, the three dealt with both the Republic of Genoa and the Grand Duchy of Tuscany. See Giampaolo Salice, «Diaspore greche e colonizzazione», op. cit.

14 On the negotiations that led to the founding of Paomia in Corsica see Giampaolo Salice, «“Per venire a Corsiga abitare”: Negoziazione e nascita di una colonia», in Francesca Ferrando, Fausto Fioriti and Andrea Zappia (a c. di), Gli Stranieri Della Repubblica: Controllo, Gestione e Convivenza a Genova in Età Moderna, Saluzzo, Fusta Editore, 2023, p. 221‑242.

15 ASGE, Corsica, 934, Giovanni Stefanopoli to the Senate of Genoa, 7 October 1695.

16 ASGE, Corsica, 933, n.n. The document is undated but can be attributed to December 1731 or January 1732. Stefanopoli’s petition is followed by the dispatch of 18 January 1738, in which Cardinal Spinola follows up on his requests, addressing them to the Senate of Genoa. See ibid.

17 ASGE, Corsica, 943. Letter from Zakynthos dated 22 September 1677, from Michele Cozifachi Stefanopoli to Giovanni and Michele Stefanopoli.

18 ASGE, Corsica, 943. Letter from Genoa dated 30 September 1678, from Francesco Maria da Chios to Teodoro Bulzo.

19 See, for example, the blurb entitled Ephémerides Corses, published in Le Petit Bastiais : journal quotidien, no 2964, 5 May 1889, <https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k13328715>.

20 Marie‑Anne Comnène, Cargèse…, op. cit., p. 87‑133.

21 Raoul Colonna de Cesari Rocca, Le nid de l’aigle : Napoléon, sa patrie, son foyer, sa race, d’après les documents inédits, Paris, Librairie universelle, 1905, p. 206‑208, <https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5742890k?rk=21459;2>. On the ennobling of family history, see Roberto Bizzocchi, Genealogie incredibili: Scritti di storia nell’Europa moderna, nuova ed. riv. e ampl., Bologna, Il Mulino, «Annali dell’Istituto Storico italo‑germanico, 52», 2009 [1995].

22 Nikolaos Stephanopulos, Génie des colonies grecques…, op. cit.

23 Partenio claimed to have been consecrated as a bishop in the diocese of Morea by the metropolitan of Constantinople. Prior to migrating westward, he purportedly held the spiritual responsibility for over 3,000 souls. See ASGE, Corsica, 943. Partenio to the Genoese Senate from Paomia, 11 June 1679.

24 ASGE, Corsica, 643. Partenio and Apostoli Stefanopoli to the Genoese Senate from Paomia, 27 March 1769. The harshness of the methods and tones of this first director, Giovanni Butti, sparked strong protests from the Maniots. The mission to Genoa led by Apostoli and Giovanni Stefanopoli sent a strongly worded complaint to the senate, accusing the director of taking the house and property of the leader Nicola, ordering work for his exclusive benefit, not paying for it, seizing the assets of a widow, and interfering in spiritual matters, among other accusations. The embassy achieved the expected result, which was the replacement of the director in March 1769.

25 ASGE, Corsica 943. Dispatch to the Senate from Paomia dated 13 December 1768.

26 In the 18th century, following the destruction of Paomia by Corsican rebels and the migration of the colony to Ajaccio, a Dominican friar was appointed as the “chaplain of the Greeks”, replacing the visitor of Propaganda Fide. See ASGE, Corsica, 933, n.n., an undated document but attributable to 1737.

27 ASGE, Corsica 934. Letter from the colony leaders to the Genoese Senate, 25 March 1699.

28 Teodoro Busachj, Giorgio Stefanopoli, Teodoro Covona, Piero Stefanopoli, Michele Mundano, Calapotto Cassarà, Elia (Cassarà?) signed the letter, plus priests Giovanni Stefanopoli and Tommaso Stefanopoli. ASGE, Corsica 934. Letter from the leaders of the colony to the Genoese Senate, 25 March 1699.

29 Emiliano Beri, Genova e il suo regno: ordinamenti militari, poteri locali e controllo del Territorio in Corsica fra insurrezioni e guerre civili: 1729‑1768, Novi Ligure, Città del silenzio, «Biblioteca di cultura moderna e contemporanea, 10», 2011.

30 ASGE, Corsica 935, Letter to the Genoese Senate, 17 September 1744.

31 ASGE, Corsica 935, Letter from Teodoro Stefanopoli to the Genoese Senate, 3 February 1745.

32 Michel Stephanopoli de Comnène, Histoire des Grecs‑Maniotes en Corse, vol. ii : Ajaccio, 1731‑1775, Athènes, Association des études laconiennes, « Études laconiennes, 5 », 2000, p. 50‑52.

33 Archivio di Stato di Torino (ASTO), Corte, Paesi, Sardegna, Feudi, mazzo 23, n.n. For more details, see Giampaolo Salice, Il mare degli altri. Colonie di popolamento del Regno di Sardegna (xviii secolo), Istituto di Storia dell’Europa Mediterranea (ISEM), Cagliari/Milano/Roma, «Europa e Mediterraneo, Storia e immagini di una comunità internazionale, 44», 2023, p. 37.

34 Perhaps this episode is related to the trial that concluded with a final judgment on 22 July 1739, which convicted Lieutenant Teodoro Cassarà, Ensign Giovanni Mondano, Corporals Costantino Lacogianacci, Nicolò Cassarà, also known as Carobba, and Basilio, son of the late Nicola Ulacacci, for mutiny. ASGE, Corsica 935, Dispatch to the senate of 17 September 1744, n.n.

35 Arxiu Històric de Maó (AHM), Universitat, 390, n.n., Plea of the Greek merchants of Mahon to the vicar general of Menorca, 9 December 1743.

36 Giampaolo Salice, “Le connessioni globali della colonia «scismatica» di Minorca (1743‑1785)”, Pedralbes: Revista d’història moderna, no 37, 2017, p. 131‑162, <https://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/pedralbes/article/view/34627/34021>.

37 The National Archives (TNA), Colonial Office, 174/2.

38 ASTO, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5, Capitoli che il prete Giorgio Cassara ha presentati con supplica a Sua Maestà a nome de’ Greci stabiliti nella Maina, costa di Morea, tendenti allo stabilimento di varie colonie nel Regno di Sardegna, colle risposte ai medesimi capitoli.

39 Archivio di Stato di Cagliari (ASCA), Regio Demanio, categoria iv, Feudi, vol. 12, Capitoli sovra il progetto de’ Signori Antonio Barozzi e prete Giorgio Casara per lo stabilimento in questo regno di Sardegna di varie colonie de Greci della Maina costa di Morea.

40 ASTO, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5, Capitoli sopra il progetto per lo stabilimento di diverse famiglie greche venute dalla Corsica o d’altre che potessero da qualunque parte venire in questo regno.

41 Giampaolo Salice, Colonizzazione sabauda e diaspora greca, Viterbo, Sette Città, «Biblioteca, Serie storica, 31», 2015.

42 ASTO, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5. The list of beneficiaries can be found published in <https://storia.dh.unica.it/risorse/s/colonizzazioninterne/item/17>.

43 ASTO, Sezioni Riunite, Ufficio generale delle finanze, Prima Archiviazione, Sardegna, mazzo 5.

44 ASCA, Segreteria di Stato, ii serie, vol. 1289, Risoluzione del signor Intendente generale conte di Cordara riguardo ai greci di Montresta delli 14 maggio 1752.

45 ASTO, Corte, Paesi, Sardegna, Politico, categoria 6, mazzo 5, Capitoli concordati con li Capitano Costantino Stefanopoli e tenente Elia Cassara, come deputati dalla Colonia de’ Greci Corsi per il progetto d’introduzione e stabilimento nell’isola di Sant’Antiogo del Regno di Sardegna, di famiglie ducentoquaranta d’essi Greci, componenti seicento anime circa.

46 Captain Costantino Stefanopoli, Lieutenant Elia Cassarà, Panioto Castellacci, Nicolò Garidacci and Micalia Vagonacci.

47 ASCA, Segreteria di Stato, ii serie, vol. 1289.

48 Indeed, in 1754 twenty‑two Greek Corsican families petitioned to join those destined for Sant’Antioco. See ASCA, Segreteria di Stato, ii serie, vol. 1289. Risoluzioni prese dalla giunta ed approvato da Sua Eccellenza intorno alla esecuzione della introduzione della colonia greco‑corsa nell’isola di Sant’Antiogo dipendentemente dal real dispaccio de’ 11 settembre [1754].

49 These are the families that refused to renounce their obedience to Rome to convert to Orthodoxy and wished to reunite with their relatives who migrated to Sardinia. See Archivio storico della Congregazione per l’Evangelizzazione dei Popoli o «de Propaganda Fide» (APF), Italo‑greci, busta 4 (1741‑1760), c. 510.

50 ASCA, Segreteria di Stato, ii serie, vol. 1289.

51 Ambrogio Rossi, Osservazioni storiche sopra la Corsica, Livre XII, 1769‑1775, Lucien Auguste Letteron (dir.), Bastia, Ollagnier, 1895, p. 269, <https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k480174z/f270>.

52 APF, Italo‑Greci, busta 4 (1741‑1760), c. 351. Letter from Archbishop Francesco Guidi to the pope, Pisa, 14 June 1756.

53 Miguel Avilés Fernández and Guillermo Sena Medina (eds), Carlos III y las «Nuevas Poblaciones», [actas del ii Congreso histórico sobre las nuevas poblaciones de Carlos III en Sierra Morena y Andalucía, La Carolina, 1986] 3 vols, Córdoba, Servicio de Publ. de la Universidad de Córdoba/La Carolina, 1988; José Miguel Delgado Barrado, “La génesis del proyecto repoblador de Sierra Morena”, Boletín del Instituto de Estudios Giennenses, no 178, 2001, p. 303‑329, <https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/1198629.pdf>.

54 Archivo Histórico Nacional, Archivo Histórico de la Nobleza, Diversos, Priego, C.16, D.44.

55 Giampaolo Salice, Il mare degli altri: Colonie di popolamento del Regno di Sardegna (xviii secolo), Cagliari/Milano/Roma, Istituto di Storia dell’Europa Mediterranea (ISEM), 2023.

56 E.P. Panagopoulos, The Background of the Greek Settlers…, op. cit.

57 Archivo General de Simancas (AGS), Secretaría y Superintendencia de Hacienda (SSH), 497, f. 39.

58 The negotiation is described in Ambrogio Rossi, Osservazioni storiche…, op. cit., p. 306‑307.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1: Factions in the community of Paomia
URL http://journals.openedition.org/diasporas/docannexe/image/17370/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 451k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Giampaolo Salice, « Towards the West. Conflict and Settlement in the Maniot Diaspora (17th‑18th Centuries) »Diasporas, 43 | -1, 129-147.

Référence électronique

Giampaolo Salice, « Towards the West. Conflict and Settlement in the Maniot Diaspora (17th‑18th Centuries) »Diasporas [En ligne], 43 | 2025, mis en ligne le 11 juin 2025, consulté le 19 juillet 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/diasporas/17370 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/144ec

Haut de page

Auteur

Giampaolo Salice

Giampaolo Salice is an Associate Professor of Modern History in the Department of Letters, Languages, and Cultural Heritage at the University of Cagliari. His studies mainly focus on the History of the Early Modern Age (16th‑19th centuries), with reference to the Euro‑Mediterranean context. He is the author of essays, articles, and books on the relationship between diasporas and internal colonisation, with specific attention to the insular world of the Tyrrhenian Mediterranean in the modern age (Genoese and French Corsica, British Minorca, Sardinia, Tuscany). Additionally, he is active in the field of Digital Humanities, Digital History, and Public History.
He is a member of the research team of the five‑year program Gouverner les îles. Territoires, ressources et savoirs des sociétés insulaires en Méditerranée ( siècle), funded by École française de Rome.
He is the scientific coordinator of the research program “The Digital Atlas of Sardinia’s Maritime History” (funded by the Fondazione di Sardegna annualità 2020, evaluated by international anonymous reviewers).
Giampaolo Salice est maître de conférences en histoire moderne au Département des Lettres, Langues et Patrimoine culturel de l’Université de Cagliari. Ses études se concentrent principalement sur l’histoire de l’époque moderne (xviexixe siècles), en référence au contexte euroméditerranéen. Il est l’auteur d’essais, d’articles et d’ouvrages sur la relation entre les diasporas et la colonisation interne, avec une attention particulière au monde insulaire de la Méditerranée tyrrhénienne à l’époque moderne (Corse génoise et française, Minorque britannique, Sardaigne, Toscane). De plus, il est actif dans le domaine des Humanités numériques, de l’Histoire numérique et de l’Histoire publique.
Il est membre de l’équipe de recherche du programme quinquennal Gouverner les îles. Territoires, ressources et savoirs des sociétés insulaires en Méditerranée ( siècle), financé par l’École française de Rome. Il est le coordinateur scientifique du programme de recherche L’Atlas numérique de l’histoire maritime de la Sardaigne (financé par la Fondazione di Sardegna annualità 2020, évalué par des examinateurs anonymes internationaux).

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search