An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? Towards another Interpretation of the Maltese Place-name. L-Isla

SIMON MERCIECA An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? Towards another Interpretation of the Maltese Place-name L-Isla

SIMON MERCIECA

any historians consider the arrival in Malta of the Order of St John, Min.1530, as the prelude to many important reforms that gave greater economic and political stability to the island during the modern era. However, when one attempts to analyse the early years of the Knights Hospitallers in Malta between 1530-1565, one has to admit that historical documentation is indeed lacking. During this period, the history of the Order of St John in Malta relies mainly on the works of two series of archival documentation: the Libri Bullarum, that is, the decisions taken by the Hospitaller Council, and the Libri Conciliorum, or minutes of the Council of the Order, besides the occasional travellers' accounts and the third volume on the history of the Knights written by Giacomo Bosio. Bosio's is perhaps the most important of the better known sources on the history of Malta for most of the sixteenth century. The sources of information become even scarcer when one tries to analyse the island's urban framework. In recent years, however, the Notarial Archives have begun to be exploited in assessments of the urban and rural fabric existing in Malta in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, and they proved to be a rich resource. They are the subject of a number of dissertations undertaken by students of the History Department of the University of Malta, as well as of two fundamental works on the Rhodiot community present in Birgu in the early sixteenth century.1 Yet, the study of Malta's urban and social structure in the early years of the Knights of St John's rwe is still in its early phase. These were my feelings when I started researching the history of L-Isla, or as it is also commonly known, Senglea, as it developed during the first thirty-five years of the Hospitaller 722 Simon Mercieca

Knights in Malta. The information available is at best minimal. This means that until other material is unearthed, what follows hereunder remains in need of further corroboration. Nevertheless, I shall attempt to prove that the conclusions reached are based on sound historical conjecture.

The Historical Framework The tongue of land that constitutes the present conurbation of L-Isla embraces two of the principal entrances to the Grand Harbour. It was around the mid-1550s that a proper fortified city began to develop in this area. It is rather strange that despite its privileged geographical setting, this tongue of land failed for a long period of time, that is, until the middle of the sixteenth century, to stimulate any urban development. The words that the novelist Italo Calvino puts on the lips of his imaginary figure Marco Polo offer a preamble to the understanding of the sequence of historical events that led to the development of the area. According to Calvino's Marco Polo, a city is not made by the number of the stairs of its stepped streets or the number of the arches of its porticos, or the thatches on the roofs, but by the interaction 'tra le misure del suo spazio e gli avvenimenti del suo passatd.2 Geographically, L-Isla is situated at the heart of Grand Harbour, to the east of Malta. Until 1530, its outline was that of a karstic garden standing on high ground. However this position was of no particular advantage. Throughout the Middle Ages, the governors of these islands preferred developing another peninsula, located opposite L-Isla, where today Birgu is situated. While L-Isla is geo-physically longer, the other peninsula is closer to the harbour entrance. It was this factor which led to the development of Birgu. The area where L-Isla is to be found today must have been considered to be less conducive to stimulating urban and economic development, with the result that it remained a poor and uninviting place until the early modem period. To understand the urban development that ensued, one must bear in mind the structure of L-Isla. Its peninsular environment may be considered as a second reason for urban growth taking so long to get underway. L-Isla is 275 metres long and 107 metres wide.3 Such dimensions make the area amenable for urban development. However, L-Isla's geographic setting has one basic shortcoming that, in all probability, contributed to the fact that for many years it remained unexploited. L-Isla consists of two promontories with a ditch separating them. In fact L-Isla's highest point is 27 metres above sea level. This height is practically reached by both promontories, and between them there is a 12-metre drop.4 The channel between the two promontories, though higher than the water level, is positioned too low to guarantee defensive security, making the area less attractive to urban development. 'This would explain the comparative tardiness of urban 'growth in the area, which in fact occurred much later than Mdina or Birgu. When An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 723 it did happen, it happened in symbiosis with the expansion of Birgu rather than in isolation. Another reason why L-Isla took long to develop is to be found in certain legal practices existing in the Middle Ages. This land was a demesne; its landlords were, at different times, the King of Sicily, the King of Aragon, the rulers of Naples, or whoever it was who was ruling over Malta at any given time. In other words it was a fief. Unlike other fiefdoms, such as the nearby fief della Marsa, the peninsula of Senglea (itself a fiefdom) was not conferred upon any of the emerging ruling families in Italy. It remained tied to the crown, with the result that it was automatically transferred to the Knights once they accepted from the Emperor Charles V in 1530 the grant of Tripoli together with the islands of Malta, Gozo and Comino. The situation with regard to the fief of Marsa was slightly different, as it had been enfeoffed to Ettore Pignatelli, the viceroy of Sicily, after the latter had purchased this fief from Alvaro de Nava in 1530 with the Emperor Charles V's consent.5 Once the Order of St John accepted Malta, they had to recognize the Pignatelli family as the titleholders to this property. On their part, the Pignatelli had to swear allegiance to the Order, an act they offiCially performed in 1537.6 The same legal statute was not binding on the land in Birgu. This factor definitely worked in Birgu's favour and helped the area develop differently. The lack of feudal encumbrance made it much easier for the common people, merchants and burghers to purchase property there. One must of course remember that buying by third parties of property or land, which fell under either demesnial or feudal jurisdiction, was not permitted. The importance of the area of L-Isla within the domain of Sicily was secondary. It is mentioned in fourteenth-century documents and is referred to as Petra Longa. The latter was an Italian toponym which meant a long tongue of land. What is of interest, in said documents, is the fact that this land is not associated with Birgu, but is referred to as forming part of Zejtun,7 which was (and still is) one of the biggest villages to the south-east of Malta. Historically speaking, the origin of L-Isla as a town therefore dates back to the arrival of the Order of St John. Yet, for strategic reasons, the Knights preferred Birgu as their town of residence. This choice was conditioned by naval considerations. Birgu was a maritime town par excellence. By 1530, Birgu was already established and had cadres of people experienced in maritime businesses. It was the only urban zone in Malta at the time that could offer direct access to the outside world through seaborne communications. Birgu immediately prospered on the Knights' arrival: the place, from a land of poor hovels and shabbily built houses, began slowly to turn into an area of upgraded properties housing a bourgeois milieu, in which each edifice· (as in Calvino's imaginary city of Zoe), was different and had idiosyncratic characteristics.8 Having said that, it is important to point out 724 Simon Mercieca that, in the long run, it was L-Isla that stood to benefit most from this new situation, as will be shown below. Initially, it was a humdrum experience that awaited L-Isla between the period 1530 and 1551. Indeed, a quick look at the history of L-Isla after 1530 indicates that the town was characterized by two primary features. The first is linked to the nature of the land and its geographic morphology. Since this was demesnial territory, it came directly under the hands of the Knights, as did all other areas holding a similar legal title. In other words, all of Senglea was directly administered by the Order of St John. On the other hand, all other property which was owned by third parties remained in private hands until other arrangements were made so that, wherever necessary, it was taken over by the new Hospitaller rulers. The second feature is linked to the town's location: as L-Isla is only a stone's throwaway from Birgu, one would have expected that it would undergo some form of privileged development. However, the first decades of the Hospitallers' rule in Malta proved to be inauspicious for this particular peninsula. In fact, it had a belated growth. Hardly any development took place during the reign of Malta's first Grand Master, Philippe de Villiers de l'Isle Adam. During the short reign of the second Grand Master, Pierino del Ponte (1534-1535), there was the first serious evaluation of the area and it was during his times that two windmills were built on the point of L-Isla. Apart from that, it does not seem that any important urban construction took place in the area. The building of these windmills did not bring any important changes, as they failed to influence the demographic growth of the area, which remained static for nearly two decades. The paradoxical reflection made by P. Horden and N. Purcell on the constructions of the watermills, holds for the emerging iandscape of Senglea as a whole. 'The contingent fact that there were all these mills in this environment had only a limited effect on its history because of the overriding effects of connectivity or its absence'.9 The third Grand Master, Fra Didiers de Sainte Jaille (1535-1536) could not leave any imprint because he died within a few days after his election. The period of the fourth Grand Master, Fra Juan d'Homedes (1536-1553) was one of stasis. In L-Isla, he discovered a place where he could enjoy the pastimes of Renaissance princes, using the area for hunting and sport. Thus, except for the building of some hunting lodges, a small chapel dedicated to St Julian, who is the hunters' patron saint, and the planting of trees, hardly anything was done to develop this territory into a fully-fledged town, to the extent that this tongue of land became also known as il giardino (the garden), due also to the presence of Homedes's hunting lodges.10 However, events in the middle of the sixteenth century changed L-Isla's status forever. Towards the middle of the century, Malta suffered a series of Muslim attacks which reached their peak in 1551, when the Turkish fleet managed to enter, unhindered, one of the harbour inlets, the port of An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 725

Marsamxetto. It then turned towards Gozo and subjected nearly all the inhabitants of the latter island to slavery with virtually no difficulty and, at leisure, proceeded towards Tripoli; there repeating similar raids. These events were a serious setback for Homedes, who was blamed in various quarters for the disastrous performance of the Order in preventing such humiliating defeats - indeed, he was accused of being directly responsible for this military debacle, as he failed to take the necessary precautions to avoid such a catastrophe. 11 The 1551 events were a watershed for L-Isla, as it was after this attack that Homedes realised the importance of the area in military terms and, in 1552, he thought of building a fortress at the landward entrance of the peninsula, which was later to be named Fort Saint Michael. Yet the personal humiliation suffered by the Grand Master at the fall of Gozo and the loss of Tripoli was not so easily forgotten. It was too great a humiliation for Homedes, who died shortly after approving the project. In 1553, Fra Claude de la Sengle was elected as the new Grand Master (1553-1557). La Sengle continued Homedes's belated project. He realised the strategic importance of this tongue of land, so much so that he constructed on this place a well-fortified compound.I2 For the first time in L-Isla's history, there was a ruler who from the beginning of his reign had a new perception of this area. This land no longer signified a place of leisure, reserved for princely hunting. For this purpose, another area was earmarked at Buschetto in Rabat. La Sengle instead conceived L-Isla as a subordinate urban zone to the town of Birgu, linking it also to the defensive resources of Birgu. La Sengle set about giving this land the characteristics of a town by starting to fortify it, first by completing the building of a fortress at the entrance to L-Isla, which he called St Michael. To stimulate the urban development of the place, he built a palace with a large garden. This, it was hoped, would help attract people to the area and perhaps induce them to live within this bounded space. However, La Sengle's years must have still been rather problematic as they failed to address legal problems attached to the ownership of land in L-Isla. Private individuals were still not allowed to own land in the area, and those who went to live there could only take up residence in La Sengle's compound. Maps of Malta published during the 1550s support this conclusion, as the structure indicated in the area of Senglea is this compound, with one or two other edifices which probably represent the chapel of St Julian and the windmills.13 In these circumstances, it is highly plausible to think that the final push to having this area developed into an urban place came during the times of Grand Master Jean de la Valette (1557-68). It was in fact at La Valette's time that certain maps of Malta began to represent this new urban space. Nicolas Beatrizet, for example,.in his map of the Maltese Grand Harbour, published around 1563, depicts L-Isla as a fully-fledged town,14 whilst in 1565, the cartographer Nicolo Nelli also ascribed the title of 726 Simon Mercieca town to this area, when he described Fort St Michael as situated allo Borgo.IS Other cartographers named the place Borgo San Michele.16 An anonymous seventeenth-century document that Professor Godfrey Wettinger has identified as the work of the bishop's vicar general and pro-inquisitor of Malta, Filippo Borgia (d. 1649), shows clearly that Senglea had come to be directly identified, in the eyes of the masses, with Grand Master La Sengle even though historically, it was Homedes who actually initiated works in this town. In fact, Borgia was aware of this imprecision, as he found himself compelled to write that even though the Tower of St Michael was projected at the time of Homedes, the people in general considered it to be the work of Grand Master La Sengle.17 That said, a highly determining factor in Senglea's history was the reinforcement of the fortress on the edge of Birgu, which happened during the time of La Sengle. He also oversaw the building of towers (or cavaliers) at the entrance to Birgu, with the most important section being assigned to the Knights of Castile, while another stronghold (as already explained) was built at the entrance to L-Isla, which was known as Fort St MichaeL Thus land attacks, particularly from Birgu's hinterland, which were known as the heights of Santa Margherita, could be withstood from two flanks, whilst Senglea's point could rely on the artillery fire of Fort St Angelo for its defence. Last but not least, the new fort built on the promontory of Sciberras controlled access to the two ports: that of Grand Harbour as well as of Marsamxetto. It was due to all this development that L-Isla started to take on the contours of a town and from Petra Longa, or from the other Sicilian name of isula (or island) by which it was mostly known until then, it began to be called Senglea. However, there remained serious problems with the overall urban context. L-Isla was not the only land that fell under a form of feudal system and was earmarked for construction. Others were in a similar situation, as was the case of the previously mentioned fiefdom of Marsa. Its redemption occurred much later than L-Isla. It was only in 1630 that this fief was ceded by Grand Master De Paule, after the Order had recovered the territory from its private owners and allowed it to be used for dwellings. It would seem that L-Isla underwent the same process, with the simple difference that while Casal N uovo - or Paola as the fief of Marsa became officially known - was orderly and planned, development in L-Isla initially lacked comparable co­ ordination, with the result that the first buildings followed a haphazard plan of development, as can well be attested from the maps of the period. IS By contrast, the development of Casal Nuovo followed a well-ordered procedure, governed by an official decision taken by the Council of the Order, in which it was decreed that a piece of land which was until then being used mainly for agriculture was going to be given for housing development. No comparable judicial decree was issued for L-Isla, with the result that serious problems ensued regarding the ownership of the land by the residents who went to live there. It was only at the beginning of the seventeenth century that these problems were truly resolved. 19 An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 727

Figure 1 A detail from Bartolomeo Genga's map of the Grand Harbour amongst others, L-Isla as it was in c. 1558. The only important building present in the latter area is a compound. (© Albert Ganado collection)

A Diachronic Study of the Toponym L-Isla I believe that the origins of the place-name L-Isla are linked to this issue of land ownership in Senglea. Indeed, I will be putting forward a different perspective from the ones advanced so far, though clearly this occurs here without prejudice to any other interpretation concerning this place-name. It is a fact, as the linguist de Saussure pertinently argues, that the way in which people choose to call things is arbitrary and ultimately inscrutable,2o with the result that more often than not the evolution of words remains to all intents and purposes unaccountable. De Saussure's statement applies to certain historical questions concerning toponyms, whose origins can rarely be firmly established because they allow scope for judicious speculation. It is not my intention to confront my arguments with other valid explanations given in the past with regard to the origins of the name or to delegitimize these studies. My arguments are only intended to show that, before a situation where no hard evidence has survived concerning the origins of the majority of place-names, there can be more than one historical .explanation advanced to account for those names, and it will then be up to the competent reader to assess the different claims and weigh up their relative tenability. 728 Simon Mercieca

The first historian to seriously attempt a historical interpretation of the origins of the toponym of L-Isla was Gian Francesco Abela. In 1657, Abela published his book Descrittione di Malta where he gave both a historical account of the islands of Malta and Gozo and a physical description and a religious portrait of the these islands. His studies also included an overview of Maltese place-names. The place-name L-Isla was analyzed by Abela, who regarded it as a derivation of the Italian word isola. Late medieval documents attest to the use of the word isola prior to the time of the arrival of the Order in Malta. The toponym Isula for example, appears in a document dated 1517. This toponym is rendered by Professor Godfrey Wettinger into the word L­ Isla. The document reports that 'six workers and two slaves went to L-Isla to collect soil (to be used as filler on the castle walls) whilst others had been sent to L-Isla to transport things'. Wettinger shares Abela's opinion and he considers it as 'obviously a translation of an original gzira (the Maltese word meaning an island) which originally meant peninsula as well as island.'21 This explanation can be placed within a historical framework. It means that there existed a linguistic process through which the Italian word isola was assimilated into the Maltese word L-Isla, and that this probably happened through interaction with the adoption of the French word isle. The presence of many French Knights in Malta after 1530 would have facilitated such a lexical transition. This hypothesis is collaborated by the fact that in old French, the word for island was isle. Its pronunciation was very similar to the Maltese L-Isla. The process leading to the currency of the Maltese place-name of L-Isla can now be historically explained and occurred during the time of Grand Master La Sengle. Cartographic evidence shows that this tongue of land began to be identified from the times of La Sengle onwards either as Isola di San Michele22 or La Sengle23 or the Isle de la Sengle.24 Yet, the same cartographic evidence can also be used to show that the Maltese place-name L-Isla could have had a different origin from that of isola, even if certain linguistic explanations are valid within both cases. Another explanation can be that the word L-Isla is derived directly from the Sicilian wordysula. However, this statement's tenability is conditioned on a number of linguistic considerations concerning the phonetic nature of the consonant's'. The primary consideration here is that the consonant's' in the Sicilian word ysula was unvoiced. I shall pause here on this aspect of my argument, as it will be taken up at length further in the paper. I propose an alterative derivation to the word Isla, while remaining fully aware that this definition may have a number of pitfalls. I recognize that my arguments are based on anecdotal evidence and the argumentation is subject to review, as the hypothesis rests on sparse historical evidence. Furthermore, the proposed arguments give rise to a series of leading questions, as they involve a major semantic dissonance from the explanation of the toponym's origin given up to now. The first consideration to keep in mind is of a geographic nature. How An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 729 could it be that the word L-Isla is derived from the Italian word isola when in fact this area was never an island? Geographically, L-Isla is a peninsula and there is no historical documentation which could suggest that at some point in time this stretch of land was a separate island. Naturally) this objection only holds its ground if one does not give credence to the fact that the place may well have had an Arabic name, that of gzira, and that this toponym fell out of use after it had been replaced by the Italian version of the word. This would mean that the semantic word gzira had in the past the same meaning as in old Arabic, where it could either mean a 'peninsula' or an 'island'.25 Secondly, whilst isola can be considered to be the translation of the Maltese word gzira, the current word used in Maltese to denote the area is not isola but L-Isla. Then one has to explain how this Arabic word, after having been translated into Italian (and this could only be done by a very small nucleus of the educated elite), could assume extensive popular use. It is rather difficult to explain linguistically how a mass of the population which spoke mainly an Arabic dialect, could have swapped an Arab place-name with a Romance word. Certain linguistic models show that when such linguistic changes happen, the man in the street would tend to keep both the Semitic and the Romance words by joining the two together to create a new place-name, as was the case with the toponyms Marsascala and Abbazia tad-Dejr.26 There are some linguistic difficulties to accepting any form of transformation of isola into L-Isla. After all, Maltese as spoken in the fifteenth and even the sixteenth century was predominantly Semitic, with hardly any Romance words.27 Therefore how is it that an Arabic place-name got translated by a Romance word isola, which, in turn, could have ended up translated by another Romance word? It goes without saying that semantically L-Isla is not of Semitic origin. On the other hand, one has no difficulty establishing the Romance origin of these two words, L-Isla and l'isola, which led to the determination of the mode of current usage. In daily conversation, the locality is referred to as L-Isla and not Isla. Diachronically, the use of the article can show the link of the word with its Romance origin, even if, place-names of Semitic origins in Malta, makes use of the article in the past. The use of the article for L­ Isla can aid the perception that this word is derived from its Italian counterpart. However this linguistic aspect does not overlook the fact that the name, L-Isla could have had an origin autonomous from the word isola. Of course, these points do not detract from the fact that Senglea was known as ysula at the beginning of the sixteenth century, but this could be due more to a factor of abbreviation of the Italian word 'peninsula' than any connection with the proper meaning of the word (island'. It is hard to believe that this tongue of land brought to the minds of the past people of Malta the idea of an island. The idea of a distinctive origin of these two words, L-Isla and l'isola, 730 Sinrron ~ercieca means that these two terms had a distinct use in history. There is' strong evidence that these two words were in use contemporaneously, as can be attested through cartographic evidence, and if they are related, they are interrelated only coincidentally. After all, the use of both these words, during the same period, obliges one to look into the origin of the word L-Isla in a manner separate from that of isola, thus moving away from a geophysical explanation. I now wish to propose the French word isle to explain the origins of the word Isla. If one were to look at the semantics of all the names used to refer to this place, one will often find topographical or historical associations. The earliest reference to this locality is the name of Petra Longa28 ('long rock'), a reflection of its peninsular structure. It is only towards the end of the fifteenth century and the beginning of the sixteenth century that one finds the use of the word isola. However, one must also add that the use of the word Petra Longa took a long time to die out. Therefore, if one accepts that the' word isola was used during the sixteenth century in relation to L-Isla, one will have to admit that there exists difficulty in explaining the geographic associations of this word due to the simple fact that this territory was never an island. If one studies the linguistic similarity between the word Isla and isle one must acknowledge that it is linguistically highly probable that the word L-Isla'derived from isle rather than from the Sicilian word ysula, and much more less probably from the Italian isola. Phonetically, the word isle in Medieval French was similarly pronounced to the way the word L-Isla is currently said in Maltese. Furthermore, phonologically and phonetically~ it is very difficult for the first voiced consonant, 's', which the Italian word isola has the sound of a ·'z', to be devoiced into an's'. In fact, the first consonant of the Maltese word L-Isla carries the sound of an's'. Such a devoicing procedure does not occur in the case of this French word. Moreover, if one had to study some linguistic examples of Maltese words of Romance derivation, one would notice that they have failed to follow the model of the word L-Isla. In fact, words derived from Italian which had a voiced's' followed by an '1' consonant, preserved the voiced's' letter after they entered the Maltese language. A case in point is the Italian word slogare. This word has· the same consonant sequence of L-Isla with the difference that it retained the voiced consonant's' up to the present day. Thus, this Italian word was corrupted into the Maltese language as zlugat. The same process is to be witnessed with another Italian word, slancio, which in Maltese began to be pronounced zlanc. On the contrary, loan words in Maltese, where the original consonants were an unvoiced "s' followed by the '1' consonant, retained. their original 'sound' as is, the· Gase . with the Italian word slavo which 'became slav, 'or the .word sUtta which also ·retained its unvoiced's' letter in Maltese. The argument would be different if one were'to take into consideration An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 731 the Latin word insula for an island. In this case, the's' would have been unvoiced, because it is preceded by the consonantal sound'n'. However, in Latin documents, this word is rarely found, as more often. than not it is written in the Italian way, implying that it was being pronounced by the voiced consonant's'. The earliest record concerning this place-name, dating to 1517, recorded this toponym as ysula.29 The notary Giuseppe ,Buttigieg also wrote this place-name as ysula in 1534,30 whilst another contemporary, notary Giuseppe de Guevara, recorded the name jsula. 31 It is of interest to note that, at least in these last two references, the text was in Latin:while only in the first example was it in Italian. The question remains whether the-name wasjsula or ysula was being pronounced in the North Italian way or Sicilian way. It has to be excluded that it was being referred to'in a Latin nomenclature as whenever the Latin word for an 'island'· was used in connection with Senglea, it was written with an 'n'.32 In fact the'phrase used was Insula Sengleae. The next question is whether the written form, isula or ysula, was being pronounced with a voiced or an unvoiced consonant, 's'. The presence of the vowel 'u' can indicate that the's' is unvoiced and if this is the case, the derivation of the word L-Isla points to Sicilian origins.33 We would then have a situation where the word was pronounced one.way·and written in another. In other words, both the common people. and- the educ'ated elite were saying L-Isla in their informal conversations but would ·write l'Isola or Isula in their formal record keeping.34 This interpretation' prompts an inevitable question, that is, whether the word L-Isla points to Sicilian origins -or dates further back in history to Aragonese or Castilian c;ierivation. In, both these latter languages, the use of the word Isla has the d!)uble meaning of island and peninsula. One has to remember that until 1530 ·Malta formed part of the Aragonese kingdom. Yet, the interpretation that:L.,:Isla'is a spoken variation of the written formjsula still leaves unresolved issues arising··from other explanations for the origins of the word L-Isla, ' such· that it- is a translation of the Arabic word gzira. If one were to consider~that L-Isla was the popular spoken form and l'Isola became its written >variation, one is tempted to project the same argument to the Semitic word gzita and consider whether this place was popularly known by this appellation while· being referred to in contracts and legal documents by an Italian/Sicilian translation. However, the same argument raises further intriguing 'linguistic issues, especially for those documents written in Latin, where, ,anomalously, the place-name is recorded in Sicilian or Italian. In this case, one might ask why the notary did not write the place-name in Latin but used .the -Sicilian toponym. Moreover, in other notarial contracts the place-names.;.. including those written in Maltese - have not been.translated to.Italian or written-in what would have appeared at the time to be the. correct form :but were .left in the idiomatic form used by clients. Therefore, these notarial documents seem to point to a situation where at this time, 'the current place-name used for this area was not yet L-Isla but Ysula .. 732 Simon Mercieca

What is historically correct without any shadow of doubt is the fact that the word ysula had been recorded for the first time in the second decade of the sixteenth century. This fact will leave open the debate on the phonetic interpretation of the's' consonant. In this context, I think that it is equally safe to consider the pronunciation of the's' consonant as a voiced vowel. The voiced vowel's' in the word isola is associated with the modern Italian pronunciation of this word, in particular, with the Tuscan and the North Italian dialects. Elements of Tuscan Italian are usually associated with the presence of the Knights of Saint John. However, the Maltese and the Church had connections with Northern Italy dating back to the late Middle Ages. Commerce has been recorded as having been undertaken with Pisa,35 Genoa,36 Venice37 and Dubrovnik38 and the local Church and members of the local elite were attentive to the political changes that were occurring in Rome and beyond, as can be seen from the introduction of parish registers ,39 or from the covert references to the Lutheran schism,40 both of which episodes predate the period of the Knights. The last point concerns the ending vowel 'a' of the word L-Isla. The use of this vowel can question the derivation of the word L-Isla from its French equivalent, as the use of such a vowel is also encountered in the Catalan, Sicilian and Italian counterpart of this term but not in the French one. Such a difference should not weaken the historical argwnent I am putting forward for the origins of this toponym. The other name used for this place, that is Senglea, which is also of French origin, had undergone a similar change. The word Senglea originally stood for the name of the French Grand Master Claude de la Sengle, and in old documents, such as maps, this toponym was written Sengle. Eventually~ the latter word was Italianized by the addition of the final vowel 'a'. A similar process could have materialised with regard to the other French word isle, with the difference that in this case, the vowel 'e' was dropped to be replaced by the vowel 'a'. However, my arguments in favour of the French origins of the word L­ Isla are based more on historical reasoning than on linguistic theories. On the basis of the historical debate that I am proposing, there can exist a different interpretation to the established ones concerning the origins of the place-name L-Isla. This is why I am suggesting that it should be very actively considered that the name L-Isla is not derived from isola or isula or gzira but has its own distinctive history. The two forms of isula or ysula (which had been encountered in the notarial documents during the first half of the sixteenth century) stopped being used, at least in the written documentation, by the middle of the sixteenth century, to be replaced by the standardised Italian form of isola. This change coincided with the slow urbanisation process in the area. But the basis of my final point is not linguistic but historicaL I am suggesting that the current word L-Isla entered Maltese parlance later in time, and that this word came into usage during or after the time of Grand Master La Sengle. An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 733

Other Nomenclatures for this Area As seen earlier on, shortly after the arrival of the Knights two windmills were built on L-Isla's promontory and they led to the place being known as the Monte del Mulino.41 The first promontory, which is to be found at the entrance to L­ Isla, was known as Monte San Giuliano42 because of the church built in the area in 153943 and dedicated to this saint. After 1552, Fort St Michael was built and this led to the locality taking the name of this latter saint, as it was referred to as Borgo San Michele 44 or simply as Forte San Michele. 45 However, shortly after 1551, these names began very slowly to lose their importance as this area began to be known also as La Sengle46 in honour of Grand Master Claude de la Sengle who founded this place as a town. The identification of the area with Fort St Michael continued for some years after the siege of 1565, but it was rarely used after the sixteenth century. In the early seventeenth century, the phrase Isola S. Michele was applied instead.47 The same process was experienced by the name isola, even if the use of this word would continue up to the middle of the seventeenth century. After the seventeenth century, it was occasionally used, but the word Senglea became the more common appellation., The place also began to be identified, especially in French published material, as the ville de la Sengle48 or la Sengle.49 Senglea is the Italian version of the latter two words. However, one cannot forget the popular format that has survived in common parlance, that of L-Isla. There is, then, another name given to L-Isla which however has never been used except as a mode of expression in official documents. After the Great Siege, the locality was given the status of a city and called Civitas Invicta or the 'Unconquered City'. Therefore, by the middle of the sixteenth century, we have three names in current use, that of Senglea, Isola and L-Isla. It would appear that these three toponyms began 'competing' with each other. At times the locality was called Isola and at others L-Isla. Here one has to admit that people in the sixteenth century began to accept the use of the two terms of both Isola as well as Isla for that place. This means that the inhabitants began to consider the two names as distinct from each other. The former word had a limited usage as it was used primarily by the educated elite, whilst the latter became the preferred one among the common people. Reinforcing this point is the fact that it is abundantly clear that, prior to the arrival of the Order in Malta, there is not a single document that carries the word Isla, but only the word isola was used. This signifies that the word L-Isla became common during the period of the Knights of Malta. However, this does not seem to have been immediate and, at least in official documents, different names coexisted for a long period. The use of different place-names can be an indication of the difficulties experienced by the people in asserting one form over another. During the early decades of the Knights' stay in Malta, this zone was officially known as Isola rather than 734 Simon Mercieca as St Michael, whereas, if one looks at later documents, in particular the church records, one immediately notices that the word Senglea is the most frequently used in official documents. At the same time, judging from today's use of this word, it appears to have been much less prominent in common usage. On the other hand, the word L-Isla finds more support in French printed material or in pop:ular usage~ so much so that even today this is the word most commonly used when referring to this town. The term isola appears to have been used widely during the ~ixteenth century but, in time, it lost its aura of prestige by the late seventeenth century. It was still being used in -some official documentat~on to describe individuals hailing from this place, at least as late as the mid-seventeenth century. Thus, to give two examples, in 1594, the parish priest of Valletta described one of the witnesses who had been called to appear: in front of the Inquisition in Birgu to be a resident del Isola,5o while in 1656, the galleys were said to have been berthed all'Isola.51 The word isola would go on to lose much of its linguistic importance in favo"iir or" the pla~e-name Senglea. From the late seventeenth century, individu8J.s from L-Isla appearing at the Bishop's court to act as witnesses in connection with permission to marry foreign residents, or as they were known as Status, Liberi, had their residence constantly recorded as Senglea. Thus, in 1£>99, Gio Luca Xiriha was described as having been born in Senglea.52 The same place-name was written for Gregorii Abela in 172053 and Gioacchin Demartino in 17.81.54 These references are only intended as examples attesting to the fact of ,this. greater incidence of Senglea. On the other hand, isola was rarely used. Increasingly, it was restricted to usages and contexts seeking to connote a nostalgic link to the past. This rather elitist usage remained in use until the twentieth century. The conflicts over language that saw the decline of Italian as the language of instruction, in favour of English and Maltese, put an end t'o the use of the word when referring to Senglea. ' It is practically 'impossible to account for the evolution of the word isle. At no point was the word L-Isla, in its Maltese format, recorded in the acts. This do~s not mean tq.at this word had lost any of its currency. If that had been the case, one ~ould ~eed to explain how this format could have survived up to today. The reason for the'lack of any record must rather lie in the fact that the majority of the PQP'!llation was'uneducated and spoke an Arabic diale.ct. The 'word L­ Isla began t'~ gain ,popularity among the lower classes, who adopted it as part of their Malt~se ,vocabulary, but as it was not considered to form part of an 'o(fiCial'register, and possibly also because it was simply considered to be a French word~ it was' never noted in the Italian written records. In other words, as long as Italian culture remained strong and any documentation was written in Italian or Latin, one can expect an imbalance in fav~ur of the'interpretation of the word Isla, as originating from Italian. On the other hand, if one accepts the French interpretation one has to consider the .fact that during the era prior to the siege the French knights were in a majority and the Grand Masters were virtually all French. Mter An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 735 all, the Grand Master who gave his name to this town was the Frenchman Claude de la Sengle. Moreover, Senglea received a boost in terms of its urban, growth at the time of another French Grand Master, La Valette. At least this French influence could be discerned from the fact that this locality was known as la Sengle and at least in the eighteenth century, it was also recorded as l'isle de la Sengle. Yet, when studying the toponym of this peninsula, we have to take into consideration another factor and another name which up to now has not been mentioned at all. I am referring to the Greek word by which L-Isla was also known after the arrival of the Knights and which was completely forgotten by the end of the sixteenth century. After 1530 this area was sometimes referred to as chersoneso, a Greek word meaning peninsula.55 The use of the Greek word is linked to that part of the Greek population that came to Malta with the arrival of the Knights and lived in this locality. As will be seen; this is a factor with distinct implications in the historical evaluation of L­ Isla as a toponym. As stated before, the origin of the word L-Isla has French roots. Here I also wish to restate the difference of my opinion from Gian Francesco Abela's, who considers the word to be a variation of the word isola. Works like those of Abela only demonstrate one thing: that by the middle of the seventeenth century the true origin of the word had' been lost. It was forgotten that the origin of the word isla was to be found in the Medieval French isle. This latter word had two meanings. It was used in the limited sense meaning an island but later it had the wider m.eaning of a closed territory that falls under ecclesiastical or diocesan jurisdiction. As I have largely discounted the possibility that the origin of the word might be linked to the geographical setting of an island, I strongly feel that its origins might instead be looked for in a metaphorical or connotative use, of isle. If one had to look at the explanation given by Abbe Expilly in :his geographical dictionary, called Dictionnaire geographique, historique et politique des,Gaules et de la France and published in 1764, one finds grounds for an alternative explanation for the origins of the toponym L-Isla. The entry, for the word isle reads as 'ville avec unejustice royale' or territory which.belongs to some designated individual. As an example he gives the nam~ of the Isle-de-N oe which is to be found in Gascony in France. Expilly demonstrates that the juridical significance of the :word isle w.as one that was still valid in the France of his day. However the word 'royal' was added to this concept later. The words justice royale are. used according to the political thinking of absolutism in the eighteenth century, but at the same time nothing has changed in the sense that the word isle conveyed in medieval times, which is that of a territory enjoying autonom:ous jurisdiction. This is further confirmed by Moreri in his dictionary, Le Grand Dictionnaire Historique, published in Paris in 1759. In fact ,Moreri widens the .significance of the term and because of the historical emphasis that he wish.es to give tq 736 Simon Mercieca

Figure 2 An early twentieth-century postcard showing Senglea's point. Notice that the nomenclature used for Senglea in the postcard was Isola. the semantics of the word he explains that the concept of isle goes beyond the monarchic sphere; he notes that it was used by both clergy and gentry, One must remember that the concept is still relevant today. One has only to look at the city of Paris and notice that the city together with its surrounding territory is called lIe de France. This leads us to consider this area as a Departement (as the regions are called in France), according to the sense of isle as an administratively autonomous unit. In other words I believe that there were two words used to define Senglea and that both were in use at the same time, with the difference that l'isle is at the origin of the word L-Isla whilst the other word l'isola remains an independent word that lost most of its force at the close of the sixteenth century, even though it remained in use up to the beginning of the last century within a very restricted milieu. In fact, for example, this word found a niche in old Maltese postcards at the beginning of the twentieth century. Yet it then petered out completely. This goes to show that the word did not have secure roots or had lost its popularity and become obsolete.

A Servitudo Proposition If one accepts the fact that the toponym L-Isla derives from the French isle one begins to understand better the historical course of this town and its urban development. Definitely, Expilly's toponymic explanation makes more An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 737 sense than Abela's. Abela maintains that this locality was called isola because its outline resembled an island. This is why the roots of the word Isla go deeper and are interrelated with the history of a people. In the beginning I said that this place was subjected to some sort of feudal administration. Here I discern a connection between the word, when its sense is taken within the French context, and the linguistic origins of word L-Isla. In other words, the fact the Hospitallers took this land enabled the people or the Hospitaller Order to refer to this place by the French term of l'isle to convey awareness of a new status, that of a protected territory in which unauthorized individuals could not trespass. Whoever lived within its boundaries was subject and bound to the ruler of the land, a status which for a long period of time in history was hardly any better than that of a slave or a servant. In other words, the word goes to show that this territory came under the Order's control in 1530. As no reference to this territory has been encountered in the Libri Conciliorum of the Hospitaller Order for the period 1530-1557 56 one is tempted to think that this piece of land was being directly administered by the Grand Master. If the latter was indeed the case, the land would then have fallen under what was known as the magisterial office. If this territory fell directly under the Grand Master's control, it meant that not even the Council of the Order could interfere with the former's decision. This could explain why this territory was never discussed in the Hospitallers' Council. Whatever the case, the Knights could not subject the endogenous population or European migrants who might have come to settle in Malta into even the most remote form of serfdom. If this had taken place in Senglea, then as I will try to argue, the people setting up house there must have been individuals who were under the direct subjection to the Order of St John and this bondage must also be traceable in history. This also signifies that whoever went to live in this locality fell under the Grand Master's jurisdiction. He paid some form of levy to the Order, whilst the residents were loosely bound to the land. In their book The Corrupting Sea, Horden and Purcell affirm that 'the shores, with their usually clear unilinearity and their easily intuited sequence of prominent features, readily assist the conceptualisation of space. On land, by contrast, there are so many complications that lines are less easy to determine'.57 The geographical features of Senglea, where its boundaries are mostly marked by the vagaries of the shoreline, made it very easy for any ruler to delineate a territorial space of exclusive jurisdiction. In other words the word isla was being used in the metaphorical sense meaning a restricted place, an island that was not physical but one whose origins lie within the feudal reality that had a separate jurisdiction under the Grand Master. A number of pre-Siege maps support this concept. L-Isla is presented as a barren land except for one or two buildings (which could have stood for the chapel of St Julian and the windmills respectively) and a big compound, surrounded by high walls. The cartographers were recording 738 Simon Mercieca a new reality, as in the earliest published map of Malta, the one of Jean Quintin d'Autun, which appeared in Lyons in 1536, L-Isla is presented as wilderness.58 The cartographers were associating this built-up enclosed space with the Knights of St John, and as this compound appears in maps of the 1550s, but is missing in Lafreri's map of 1551, it could imply that it was built during De La Sengle's time. It was the sole edifice existing on this tongue of land for a long period of time, as can be attested from Bartolomeo Genga's map of 1558. Genga was a reliable witness, as he must have inspected the area during his visit to Malta in 1558.59 This map is the result of his direct encounter with the place. Therefore, one can rightly conclude that until that year, Senglea was still largely comprised of only this compound, and the people who went to live there were forced to live within the perimeters of this enclosed space. Individuals who were sent or accepted to go to live there were in some way or another bound to the land. They were the direct vassals of the Grand Master. Did the arrival of the Order introduce to Malta some form of servitude that bound the people to the sea? It is a historical fact that the Knights in Rhodes had a system which bound the Greeks of that island to the sea. These Greeks had to offer their services to the Knights insofar as the men and their sons were obliged to sail with them on the seas. This form or distortion of feudalism was known as servitudo marina. 60 When the Knights came to Malta, did they attempt to impose the same system? What is certain is that this system of servitudo marina as practised in Rhodes was definitely not applied to Malta. The installation in Malta of a form of seruitus marinarie (sic) was practically impossible. Ettore Rossi writes that the use of servitus marinarie was stopped after the General Council of 1462. The reason given was the system's unpopularity in Rhodes, which forced many Greek men to emigrate rather. than having to endure the servitus marinarie system. 61 While excluding the reinstallation of the servitus marinarie system in Malta, one cannot rule out the possibility that the Knights tried to impose on some of their lands restrictions inspired from this defunct system. The fact that L-Isla was a territory of the Order could have facilitated the installation in the area of a community that was subservient to the Knights. The only possible ethnic group in Malta upon whom the Knights could have thought of imposing some form of physical restriction was the Rhodiot community. Stanley Fiorini accounts for the settlement of the Greek community in the harbour side city of Birgu.62 Fiorini's studies on this Greek community focus primarily on the Notarial Archlves. A number of interesting observations can be extracted from Fiorini's work. The nature and quality of the source itself conditions the research. The notary services were more often than not restricted to a particular milieu, those identified by the Latin writer Cassiodorus as the urbani and praepotentes. The class of individuals, whom the same Latin writer designated also as mediocres,63 are only incidentally An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 739 or indirectly referred to in these documents. This is clearly evident in the study carried out by Fiorini. Most of the Greek individuals and families studied in these notarial documents belonged to an established milieu. More often than not, they were individuals who could vouch for some sort of income. Various notarial transactions concerned the payment of rents or property transactions, the signing of marriage contracts or the making of wills. 64 On the other hand, whenever the poor are mentioned, this is done through an indirect reference, as when they were mentioned in connection with receiving alms from one of the established families or from a rich benefactor or else because they had turned to the Hospitaller Order for assistance.65 Fiorini has also undertaken a very extensive and systematic study of Rhodiot families to identify the occupations and location of residence of the male Rhodiots. The study showed that, as one would have expected, well­ established artisans and thriving merchants took up residence in prominent areas of Birgu, such as the town square, next to St Lawrence's church or else near one of the Hospitallers' auberges.66 However, despite the fact that the Rhodiots at Birgu formed a tightly knit community,67 part of this community, in particular the majority of the poor, lived on the outskirts of the town. In Europe, more often than not, the urban poor lived on the periphery of the urban fabric or in subordinate settl~ments. Birgu could not have been an exception. In the 1530s, the area of Birgu incorporated the spaces of today's Bormla and Senglea. The parish registers of Senglea (even if they start in 1587) show a strong concentration of Greeks in the area. Despite the fact that the registers began rather late, they mention a number of Greek families whose records lack the date of marriage, and many of whom are recorded as having only one or two children or else mentioned as titleless fathers in the marriage acts. This could imply that these families had been long established in the area, well before 1587. They were therefore recorded in the acts practically either when the female was having her last baby or else when one or more of their offspring was getting married. 68 The fact that the area was originally inhabited by Greeks can also be inferred by the Greek name chersoneso given to the area during this period. The fact that this toponym is not widely recorded could mean two things. First, it could not have been widely used. Secondly it could express the social standing of the Greek people living in the area, the community being so poor that the way they referred to their town was not deemed important enough to be recorded inthe official records. Instead the Italian variant was preferred. Moreover, 'Gian Francesco Abela's statement on this place-name the effect that 'hoc est peninsula Chersonesus dicta, super quae edificata fuit ara S. Michelis'69 - shows that the name was in use prior to the building of Fort St Michael, and that the town was known by that Greek toponym by at least the Greek ethnic community. In this context, the notarial records show that at least the endogenous elite referred to this place by the word of ysula. The only people who could have given this territory a Greek name was the Rhodiots community. 740 Simon Mercieca

Another factor that transpires from these early acts is that some of these Greek families are of rather humble standing. Does the fact that a Greek community lived here signify that it was bound to serve at sea? Were they (the Greeks) obliged to serve the Order or the Grand Master? These questions remain unanswered, even if they can furnish an answer to Fiorini's justified surprise at the high percentage of Rhodiots employed in seaborne activity rather than in land-based activities. Fiorini's study has put in evidence the existing tendency of Rhodiots to seek employment in maritime activities, in particular in the corso. The amount of Rhodiot males indulging in corsairing activity was judged by Fiorini 'as perhaps somewhat surprising.'70 Such a high amount of Rhodiots earning their living from corsairing is crucial in the context of this argument. A cursory look at the type of maritime professions mentioned in the notarial acts shows that, if they had to be gauged by sixteenth century standards, the Greeks living in Birgu proper would have been mainly those members of the community who were socially established and had a good job. Even those employed at sea and who lived in Birgu often belonged to the elite core of the maritime traders. Most of the mentioned professions belonged to the upper crust of the seaborne trade such as capitanus or patronus of sea vessels, pilots, naval officers who were known under the title of comes and vice-comes depending on grade, craftsmen and artisans employed on ships, professional gunners (bombarderius), musicians, shipping clerks and barber-surgeons. The only lower maritime grades recorded in the acts studied by Fiorini were the salaried rowers.71 Yet, one should note that only a handful of oarsmen are mentioned in these acts. This means that the acts are ignoring an important part of the Rhodiot community, that section made up of the more common people. There is no doubt thp.t Rhodiot ship owners employed fellow countrymen as part of their crew while Rhodiots were also employed on vessels as mariners on the Order's triremi or galleys. Due to the low status associated with that, they were perceived as belonging to the lower crusts of society, and had less cause to seek notarial services. Moreover) Senglea as a proper town began to develop after 1550 and this could be another reason why their identity could have escaped Fiorini's analysis, for they do not fall under the period covered by his study. The Senglea Parish Registers, together with the Greek name given to this locality, suggest that this lower stratum of Greek individuals and their families (or at least part of it) could have constituted the first nucleus of the inhabitants of Senglea. A number of Greek families could have been encouraged to take up residence in Senglea. They could have already been employed with the Order or else might have sought employment in the lowest grades of maritime activity, and on the example of the defunctservitus marinarae, the Hospitaller Knights could have sought to juxtapose these two diverse realities and tie these Greek mariners to the land in a rather informal way. What is certain is that the people living at L-Isla in the sixteenth century An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 741 were bound to the land. This bondage was not exactly that of serfdom. Those living in the area could leave the restricted compound. This can be proved as members of the Greek community were also being employed on the Hospitallers' galleys. Archival evidence shows that people living in the area were up to 1601 forced to pay some dues - called censi - to the Grand Master.72 Such a payment in itself was an expression of residents' subjection to the ruler. This was a well-known fact even to the enemies of the Order. So much so, that during the siege of 1565, on the day when the Turks were bombarding Senglea, the Turkish Commander-in-Chief, Mustapha Pasha, according to the chronicler Balbi, enticed the people of the town to surrender, promising to compensate them by freeing them from their bondage to the land. According to Balbi the people of L-Isla refused. They were not willing to sell themselves.73 I would like to emphasize that such an appeal happened contemporaneously to an attack on Senglea. This pledge of freedom from vassalage would make more sense if studied in the context of Senglea. Otherwise, it is difficult to understand the meaning of this pledge, as vassalage and land taxes also existed in the Turkish Empire. People living in Malta were not very different socially from their counterparts living in the Ottoman world. Why did Mustapha Pasha insist in offering the people living in L-Isla their freedom? One cannot possibly conceive that bondage was a form of penalty. This type of bondage existed throughout the Ottoman world. Countries under Turkish rule were expected to pay a levy.74 It is more likely that Mustapha made this offer because the type of bondage was much harsher. Linked to this fact, there is the point that the land fell under feudal jurisdiction and this jurisdiction was retained during the time of the Knights. The result was that the Order capitalized on the situation by further creating an encumbrance on the personal freedom of the people who lived there or who had gone to live there. In this context, the use by certain cartographers of the expression Isola Senglea 75 could prompt a different interpretation to the one given previously: Another plausible explanation could be that it was a translation made by cartographers or any other Italian writers of the French expression. In this case, the use of word isola on maps and documents, in particular those dating after 1550, had no connection with its late medieval counterpart. It would mean that the resident population began to link. this piece of land with some form of state vassalage, at least from the rule of de la Sengle onwards, bringing in the expression Isle de la Sengle. On their part, the Italian cartographers and other writers were only rendering such a new concept into Italian. It could therefore bear witness to a subjection that would have continued for many decades after the Great Siege. Following the Great Siege, the Order of St John hardly acknowledged or rewarded the services rendered by these people to the Knights. Except for the name given to the town, the people of L-Isla remained bound to the 742 Simon Mercieca land. Or at least this form of vassalage was being expressed by the payment of dues or ground rent to the Grand Master. However they wanted their freedom from this type of vassalage. They therefore made a series of petitions to the Grand Master to set them free, but he refused their pleas.76 What kept them in bondage? Was it because they gave such good service to the navy that it was not advantageous to set them free? In all probability no Grand Master was prepared to forego the direct income that these people were paying him in the form of levies. There is no ,doubt that this bondage lost most of its efficacy after the siege of 1565. Probably, because of the demographic pressure on all the port area, the Grand Master could hardly exercise the degree of physical control required in administering a system of feudal servitude. It fizzled out into the simple payment of a form of tax, as a ground rent, to the ruler. Furthermore, the fact that around 1581 the locality became a parish77 also indicates that this system of bondage had disintegrated completely. The ecclesiastical canons, as postulated by the Council of Trent, stated that a parish was to be set up in a free and unencumbered territory. All that remained was the stark reality of the residents' of the area having to pay taxes. Freedom was granted in 1601,78 and at the most opportune moment,

..

- Figure 3 , The' plaque affixed in: Senglea's parish, 'church commemorating the 1601 Council's decision by which the people of the area ,were freed from any ground ,rent. obligations or pecuniary' ties to, the land. An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 743 when the seat of Malta fell vacant following the death of Grand Master Martin Garzes (1595-1601), For this reason no Grand Master could feel that he was losing money. Thus the people were released from any bondage they had to the land, including paying taxes, and they were given their freedom during that interregnum. This was so important an event that it was commemorated with a plaque affixed in the Church of Our Lady of Victories,79 which was originally built by the Knights to commemorate the victory over the Turks. In the seventeenth century, the contents of this plaque were considered to be of great historical value to the extent of being reproduced ad litteram by Abela in his book Descrittione.80 The original plaque was eventually lost because the word setting on the present inscription does not tally exactly with Abela's description. In other words, the old plaque had been replaced by a new one whilst great attention was taken to substitute it by a faithful replica. The wording remained the same; only the paragraph composition was changed. This copy can still be viewed in the church at the entrance to the sacristy.

Conclusion The Great Siege experience, together with the reconstruction of the town, acted as catalysts and changed L-Isla very quickly. L-Isla had such a devastated landscape after three months of siege that it had to be rebuilt from scratch. This explains my previous statement that in the long run this area would benefit more from the Knights than Birgu, as while the latter preserved part of its medieval streetscape, Senglea was given a totally new urban fabric: In urban terms, L-Isla was one of the first towns, together with Valletta, that adopted the grid format. This made it a favoured locality for foreigners who sought residence in the harbour area throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. For example, the Flemish community was to be found in the early seventeenth centuries predominantly at L-Isla. The study of the parish marriage registers of all the harbour cities for the period 1550-1650 revealed that Flemish grooms were mostly taking a bride from this parish.81 In terms of urban physiognomy, L-Isla continued to progress and its importance to foreigners grew so much that not only did it remain the sailors' preferred residential area but towards the middle of the seventeenth century it also came to be viewed as a 'salubrious locality. Doctor Petrus de Franchis explains this development when, before the Inquisitor Caballero, he confesses that, in 1653 he left Valletta to go to Senglea 'for a few days ... to give my son Antonio a change of air.'82 E'inutile stabilire'se Zenobia sia da classificare tra Ie citta felice -a-tra' queUe infelice. Non Ii in queste due specie ehe ha senso dividere Ie . citta, ma in altre due: queUe ehe continuano attraverso gli anni e Ie' 744 Simon Mercieca

mutazione a dare la loro forma ai desideri e quelli in cui i desideri 0 riescono a cancellare la citta 0 ne sono cancellati. S3 Unfortunately, the story of the desires of the people living on this peninsula is lost in the debris of history. What has been constructed is a series of hypotheses. The weakest point of the above hypothesis lies in the fact that the word L-Isla as is pronounced by the Maltese, is never found recorded in the acts, but only the terms isola or Senglea were written down. Perhaps this is to be linked to the town's history. The undocumented history on the evolution of the word isla can be reflecting the stigma that this word conveyed to the educated inhabitants. It reminded them of the first inhabitants' state of subjection and bondage to the land, and was conducive to cultural prejudice. Despite inherent shortcomings which this explanation might contain, I still thought fit to put forward these hypotheses for discussion and at the same time try to give an explanation for some of the historical dynamics behind certain passages of our Great Siege history and commemorative plaques. This part of Malta's history has for long been undervalued by historians. At the same time, I have sought to ask broader questions which emerge from a consideration of the origins of this Maltese place-name, doing so, hopefully, in a manner which does not indulge in capricious or historically uninformed speculation.

References 1 S. Fiorini, 'The Rhodiot Community of 7 C. Dalli, Zmien Nofsani Malti, (Malta, Birgu. A Maltese City: 1530-c.1550', 2002) 102. Library of Mediterranean History, vol. 1 8 Calvino, 33. (1994) 183-241. Also S. Fiorini, 'The 9 P. Horden and N. Purcell, The Corrupting Rhodiots of Malta P0t10E2.400 XPONIA, Sea. A Study of Mediterranean Hi~~ory, H lIOAH THE P0t10Y AlIO THE (Blackwell, 2002) 257. . It1PYIH THI MEXPI THN KA TAAH'1'H 10 Giacomo Gastaldi's map was published AHO TOYE TOYPKOYJ; Ed. IlPA KTIKA, in Venice c.1551. A. Ganado, Valletta vol. 2, 503-512. Citta Nuova A Map History (1566-1600), 2 1. Calvina, Le CittiL lnvisibili. (Malta, 2003) 471. Ganado dates this (Mondadori - Milano, 2002) 10. map to circa 1551. I strongly believe that 3 A. Bonnici, L-Isla Fi Grajjiet il-Baiilka this map dates to the early years of Santwarju ta' Marija Bambina, vol. 1, Grand Master la Sengle's rule, and (Malta, 1981) 22-23. therefore it was executed after 155!. 4 Ibid. This conclusion is based on the way how ',' 5 G. F. Abela~ Della Descrittione di Malta, building in Senglea is presented that is (Malta, 1647) 515. in the form of a compound. 6 AOM (Archives of Malta - Valletta), 11 AOM 88, fr. 102-103v; G. Bosio, Dell' i.r Liber Conciliorum MM de Ponte Sancta Istoria della Sacra Religione et Illma lalla et Homedes Anni 1535-43, vol. 86, Militia di San Giovanni Gierosolimitano, f. 61r; AOM Decreta Conciliorum 1473· vol. 3, (Venice, 1695) 319. 1560, vol. 209, f. 169v. 12 AI;; I shall be explaining further on in the An Historically Unaccounted for Maritime Heritage? 745

paper. this is based on cartographic Mdina), ACM (Archivum Cathedrale evidence. Melitense). Misc. Ms. 439, t.9. f.5. 13 Ganado, (2003) 476-478 30 Not. G. Buttigieg, NAV (Notarial 14 Ibid., 485. Archives Valletta), R. 105/2, f. 115v; 15 A. Ganado, 'The Representation of Birgu Wettinger, (2000) 336. and Fort St Angelo in Old Maps and 31 Not. Gius. de Guevara, NAV, R. 22411, f. Views', Birgu A Maltese Maritime City, L. 328v; Wettinger, (2000) 336. Bugeja, M. Buhagiar, S. Fiorini (eds), 32 AAF (Archivum Archivescovilis Floriana) (Malta, 1993) 556. Acta Civile, 1616-1618, 28-8-1617. Also 16 Ganado, (2003) 378; A. Ganado and M. vide Bonnici, (1981) 35. Agius-Vadala, A Study in Depth of 143 33 J, M. Brincat, Il-Malti Elf Sena ta' maps representing the Great Siege of Storja, (Malta, 2000) 65; Brincat and Malta of 1565, voL 2, (Malta, 1995) 36- Bruni, (2003) 26. 27, 64. 95. 98-104. 34 Brincat, (2000) 218. 17 G. Wettinger, 'Early Maltese Popular 35 A. Luttrell, 'Venetians at Medieval Attitudes to the Government of the Malta', Melita Historica, iii (1) 74-80. Order of St John', Melita Historica, iv (3) 36 Ibid. 1974,273. 37 Ibid. 18 Vide for example Antonio Lafreri's map 38 A. Luttrell, 'Malta and Dubrovnick published in Rome in 1551. Ganado, towards the year 1380'. Melita Historica, (2003) 469. v. 158-165. 19 AOM 100, f. 172v. See also B. Dal Pozzo, 39 S. Mercieca, Community Life in the Historia della S. Religione, lib 8, pp. 440- Central Mediterranean: A Social­ 441, and Bonnici, (1981) 42-3, 163. Demographic Study of the Maltese 20 J. Culler, Saussure, (Fontana Press, Harbour Towns in Early Modern Times, 1985) 19-23. Bormla 1587 -1815, (Unpublished Ph.D 21 G. Wettinger, 'The Castrum Maris in thesis submitted at Paris IV - Sorbonne Suburb of Birgu during the Middle Ages', University, 2002) 2. Birgu A Maltese Maritime City, L. 40 C. Dalli, Maltese Late Medieval Capitoli: Bugeja, M. Buhagiar, S. Fiorini (eds.), A Study, (Unpublished B.A. (Hons) vol. I, (Malta, 1993) 54. History Dissertation - University of 22 Ganado, (2003) 534-535; Ganado, (1995) Malta, 1991) 146. 124,131. 41 Bonnici, (1981) 26. 23 Vide for example Nicolas Beatrizet map 42 Ibid. published in Rome perhaps in 1563. 43 Ibid. Ganado, (2003) 485. 44 In the map by D. Zenoi entailed '11 Porto 24 Vide for example the map of S. de di Malta di nuovo da molti erori Schmettau - M.S. Sallomus - Muner. It emendato', and published in Venice in was probably published around 1716. 1565, Senglea is recorded under such a Ganado, (1995) 563. heading. Ganado, (1993) 559. The same 25 G. Wettinger, Place-names of the Maltese heading is given in N. Nelli's map. Islands ca.1300·1800, (PEG, 2000) 336. published in 1565, and entailed 'II Porto 26 According to J. Brincat, both the words di Malta', Ibid., 558. 'Marsa' and 'Scala' mean harbour while 45 In an anonymous map of around 1565, the words 'Abbazia' and 'dejr' mean a the only name indicated for the tongue monastery. G. Brincat and F. Bruni, of land of Senglea is 'F. Sto Michele'. Malta, una Storia Linguistica, (Le Mani, Ibid., 561. 2003) 46-47. 46 For example, this name was recorded on 27 E. Fenech, Wirt Il-Muza Studji Kritici the map of N. Beatrizet and published in Komparattivi, (Malta, 1977) 15. Rome probably in 1565. Ibid., 557. The 28 Dalli, (2002) 102. same name appears in the maps of 29 Cath Mus Md (Cathedral Museum Nicol6 Nelli of 1565. (Ibid. 30-35). 746 Simon Mercieca

47 Matteo Perez d'Aleccio was one of the 60 A Luttrell, The Servitudo Marina at first to identify this place with 'Isola di Rhodes: 1306-1462 Serta Neograeca: S. Michele'. His maps were published in Amsterdamer Beitrage zur Rome in 1582. Ganado and Agius- neugriechlischen Literatur, Genschichte . Vadala, (1995) 105 -106, 109. Two year und Kunst, (1975) 50- 65. later, Philippe Thomassin published 61 E. Rossi, Storia della Marina dell'Ordine another map of the siege, in which di S. Giovanni di Gerusalemme di Rodi Senglea was indicated under the name e di Malta, (Rom a-Milano, 1926) 22. of 'Isola di S. M'. Ibid.) 117. Around 62 Fiorini, (1994) 183-241. 1615, in Venice, Francesco Valegio 63 Horden and Pureel, 277. published another map - 'Isola di S. M'. 64 Ibid. Ibid., 119. Anton Francesco Lucini 65 Fiorini, 'The Rhodiots of Malta', 506. published his map in Rome in 1631 and 66 Fiorini, (1994) 209. Senglea is again indicated under the 67 Ibid., 201. label of 'Isola di S M'. Ibid., 122. 68 This observation is based on the 48 For example, in the map published in reconstruction of families of the Paris in 1751 by AF.G. De Pal~eus and Cottonera area on which I have been engraved J. Lattre under the title 'Plan working for the last nine years. General de la Ville Capitale de Malte', L­ 69 E. Serracino-Inglott, Il-Miklem Malti, Isla is indicated by the toponym 'Ville de vol.4, (Malta, 1977) 378; Abela, (1647) la Sengle'. Ganado, (Malta, 1993) 568. 17. 49 Vide for example the map of S. 70 Fiorini, 'The Rhodiots of Malta', 506. Schmettau - M.S. Sallomus-Muller. n Fiorini, (1994) 190-195. Ibid., 563. 72 NLM (National Library of Malta) Ms. 50 Cath Mus Md, AIM (Archivum 100, f.172v. Inquisitionis Melitensis) vol. 14. f.30v. 73 F. Balbi di Corregio, The Siege of Malta 51 Wettinger, (2000) 336. 1565, trans. H. B. Balbi, (Copenhaen, 52 CEM (Curia Episcopalis Melitensis 1961) 108. Mdina) AO (Acta Originalia) Status 74 A. Cassola, The 1565 Ottoman Malta Libera, 03-12-1699. Campaign Register, (Malta, 1998) 31-32. 53 CEM AO 747 1720, Status Libera, 11-06- 75 Vide for example the map of Rabel I. 1720. Briot, 'Valletta Citta Nova di Malta" and 54 CEM AO 8301780·81, Status Libero, 30- published in Paris in 1629. Ganado, 11-1781, f. 366r. (1993) 564. Despite the fact that this 55 Bonnici, (1981) 21. map was published in Paris, the place­ 56 J. Mizzi, Catalogue of the Records of the names were given in Italian. Order of St John of Jerusalem in the 76 Bonnici, (1981) 42-3. National Library of Malta, vol. 2, part 2, 77 Ibid., 54-7. Archives 84 - 87, (Malta, 1973) and J. 78 Ibid., 163. Mizzi, Catalogue of the Records of the 79 Ibid., 43. Order of St John of Jerusalem in the 80 Abela, (1647) 18. National Library of Malta, vol. 2. part 3, 81 A Borg, Migration and Mobility in Early Archives 84-87, (Malta, 1978). Modern Malta. The Harbour-city of 57 Horden and Purcell, 126. Valletta as a case-study 1575-1650, 58 H. C. R. Vella, The Earliest Description (Unpublished M.A. Dissertation, of Malta (Lyons, 1536) by Jean Quitin University of Malta, 2003) 97. d'Autun. Translation and notes, (Malta, 82 Cath Mus Md, AIM vol. 68B. f. 374r. 1980). 83 Calvina, 34-35. 59 Ganado, (2003) 476 - 478.