Page 171 - mediterranea 45

Cancila R (letture)_8 19/04/19 17:33 Pagina 168

168 Rossella Cancila

religious authorities appealed to the enemy par excellence in order to
solve political or even personal problems. It would seem inconceivable:
how could France, Venice, even the Papacy itself («as the source of all
legitimacy in the Catholic system») commit such treachery? And yet
this can be understood if we step out of the frame of the “Clash of
Civilisations” and enter the frame of “the clash between powers”: here
the context is that of alliances with my enemies’ enemies. In short,
nothing to do with civilisations, identities or religion. By this time,
between the fourteen and fifteen hundreds, the Turks were part of the
European geopolitical scene and one could fight with them, trade with
them, or negotiate or even form alliances with them, just like with
anyone else. For them as well, the Mediterranean was virtually their
‘private garden’. They were, at the same time, from beyond and within
European history, at least from the moment when, in 1352, they had
made their entry at Gallipoli, on the western side of the Dardanelles:
“Turkey in Europe” had in this way begun its journey. In short, they
were «significant players at the table of European diplomacy» (p. 10).
Despite this clash, the Mediterranean remained an area of contact,
a permeable frontier, in which diplomatic relations, cultural exchange
and commercial interests continued to be practised. And in which, for
this very reason, there could also be space for an appeal to the eternal
enemy. The hostile dimension did not entirely put a stop to the “system
of interdependence” that characterised the Mediterranean in the
centuries of the early modern age: they observed and they negotiated,
they tested each other’s powers on water and in the field. But all of this
is only an indication of the complexity of this story, in which, as the
author notes, «there is nothing simple and linear» (p. 13).
Let us return to the appeal. Often it was launched in a hidden way.
Conclusive proof is missing. In many cases it is only a view, something
said or unsaid, diplomatic language in code, which requires us to read
between the lines. Not everything can be revealed, not everything can
be handed down to us, «the history of the appeal to the Turks is thus
a collection of mutilated fragments, of secret thoughts, of abortive
attempts, of justified accusations or unfounded smears, of blackmail
on all sides, of letters never sent, replies never written or which never
reached their destination, of coded messages that were not always
authentic, of gifts intercepted, of informers in constant alarm, of
ambushes in the ports of the Levant or on the Italian coast» (p. 145).
To appeal to the Turk remained, however, a gesture that was formally
impious.
In some cases a doubt exists that the sources are false, a product of
propaganda, put together merely to deride the enemy or to cast him in
a bad light. In many other cases the sources exist, but official or
moralising selection for political advantage has not given us the record

Mediterranea - ricerche storiche - Anno XVI - Aprile 2019 n.45
ISSN 1824-3010 (stampa) ISSN 1828-230X (online)