San Gennaro / St. Januarius

Sopra: la facciata enorme del Duomo di Napoli. Sotto: Cartolina storica dalla mia collezione personale. Notate i due campanili, che non furono mai costruiti. Anche senza di loro, la facciata è piuttosto imponente!

Above: the enormous façade of Naples Cathedral. Below: Historic postcard from my personal collection. Note the two bell towers, which were never built. Even without them, the façade is pretty imposing!

Oggi è la festa di San Gennaro, patrono di Napoli. Lui è così amato a Napoli che la cattedrale è popolarmente conosciuta come il Duomo di San Gennaro – anche se non è questo il suo nome! (In realtà si chiama la Cattedrale dell’Assunta.)  Non è esagerato dire che questa è una delle cattedrali più grandiose e artistiche del mondo. Molte delle cappelle laterali sono, di per sé, magnifici santuari. Vidi il Duomo per la prima volta nel gennaio 2001. Fu memorabile come la passeggiata che portò ad essa. Ricordate che questo “turista” di Boston era abituato a chiese molto più piccole, molto più nuove e (ovviamente) molto meno ornate. La camminata iniziò alla Basilica di Santa Chiara e alla Chiesa del Gesù Nuovo – due grandissime chiese, una accanto all’altra. Di Santa Chiara mi ricordo l’interno vasto ma spoglio, cosparso di piccoli resti di affreschi trecenteschi, in contrasto con l’interno riccamente ornato del Gesù Nuovo. Poi arrivai alla Piazza San Domenico Maggiore, di cui ricordo bene l’obelisco (ma non mi ricordo il più grande obelisco dell’Immacolata davanti al Gesù Nuovo). Della magnifica Chiesa di San Domenico Maggiore m’impressionò il soffitto a cassettoni. Che chiesa magnifica! Ognuna di queste tre chiese supererebbe la maggior parte delle cattedrali del Nord America. Da San Domenico mi diressi ad est su Spaccanapoli, la strada dove fu inventata la pizza... e una pizza mangiai! Da lì proseguì per Spaccanapoli e svoltai a sinistra in Via Duomo. Le chiese sembravano diventare sempre più grandi ... fino a quando ... arrivai al Duomo. Mi cadde la mascella. Una struttura mastodontica. Ogni cappella laterale mi sembrava in sé una grande chiesa. Ricordo la più grande di queste cappelle, la Cappella Reale del Tesoro di San Gennaro – così grande che ha la sua cupola! Ricordo anche un’altra cappella laterale, che di per sé è considerata una basilica: la Basilica di Santa Restituita, edificata nel quarto (!) secolo. Mi ricordo anche la cripta, completamente ricoperta di marmo (impressionante però non all’altezza della stupenda cripta del duomo salernitano).  Non credo ci sia un altro duomo che possa reggere il paragonare con quello di Napoli. Con la chiesa principale, la basilica del IV secolo, la cappella gotica, la cripta rinascimentale, e la ricchezza di decorazioni barocche, questo massiccio edificio eclissa quasi tutte le altre cattedrali del mondo. A noi americani oggi può sembrare strano portare il nome del mese di gennaio (come agli italiani sembra strano chiamare una femmina Giugno!). Ma Gennaro è uno dei nomi più popolari in Campania. Mio padre si chiamava Gennaro. Prese il nome dallo zio paterno Gennaro, molto amato da mio nonno e che oggi ha molti discendenti sia in Europa che in America.

Today is the feast day of St. Januarius, the patron saint of Naples. He is so beloved in Naples that the Cathedral is popularly known as St. Januarius Cathedral – even though that is not its name! (It is actually called the Cathedral of the Assumption.) It is no exaggeration to say that this is one of the grandest and most artistic cathedrals in the world. Several of the side chapels are, in themselves, magnificent sanctuaries. I first saw the Cathedral in January 2001. It was as memorable as the walk that led up to it. Remember that this “tourist” from Boston was accustomed to churches that were much smaller, much newer, and (obviously) much less ornate. The walk began at the Basilica di Santa Chiara and the Chiesa di Gesù Nuovo – two huge churches, one next to the other. I remember Santa Chiara’s vast but stark interior, dotted with small remnants of 14th-century frescoes, in contrast to the ornate interior of Gesù Nuovo. Then I reached Piazza San Domenico Maggiore, whose obelisk I remember well (but I don’t remember the larger obelisk of the Immaculate, in front of Gesù Nuovo). Inside the magnificent Church of San Domenico Maggiore, I remember the impression that the coffered ceiling made upon me. What a magnificent church! Any of these three churches would surpass most of the cathedrals in North America. From San Domenico I headed east on Spaccanapoli, the street where pizza was invented ... and I ate a pizza! From there, I continued on Spaccanapoli and took a left on Via Duomo. The churches seemed to get bigger and bigger ... until ... I arrived at the Duomo. My jaw dropped. A colossal structure. Every side chapel seemed like a large church in itself. I remember the largest of these chapels, the Royal Chapel of the Treasure of St. Januarius – so large that it has its own cupola! I also remember another side chapel, which in itself is considered a basilica: the Basilica of St. Restituita, built in the fourth (!) century. I also remember the crypt, completely covered with marble (impressive, but not on the level of the stupendous crypt of the Duomo in Salerno). I don’t think you can compare any other cathedral to that of Naples. With the main church, the fourth-century basilica, the Gothic chapel, the Renaissance crypt, and an abundance of Baroque decoration, this massive edifice eclipses most any other cathedral in the world. To us Americans today it may seem strange to name a boy after the month of January (as Italians think it’s strange to name a girl June!). But Gennaro is one of the most popular names in Campania. My father was named Gennaro. He was named after his paternal uncle Gennaro, who was very beloved by my grandfather and who has many descendants today in Europe and in America.

Cupola della Cappella Reale di S. Gennaro
The dome of the Royal Chapel of St. Januarius

Il cancello della Cappella Reale di San Gennaro. Riuscite a credere che questa sia solo una cappella laterale?!
The gate of the Royal Chapel of St. Januarius. Can you believe that this is just a side chapel?!

O che questa sia solo una cappella laterale? La Basilica di Santa Restituita fu edificata nel quarto (!) secolo.
Or that this is just a side chapel?! The Basilica of St. Restituita was built in the fourth (!) century.

La storia inverosimile della parmigiana di pollo / The improbable history of chicken parmigiana

Palermo, un dettaglio dei famosi Quattro Canti. Da notare le persiane in legno, dette parmiciane nella lingua siciliana. (Foto: Wikipedia).
Palermo, a detail of the famous Quattro Canti.  Note the wooden shutters, called persiane in Italian, parmiciane in Sicilian. (Photo: Wikipedia)

La storia inverosimile della parmigiana di pollo di Leonardo Ciampa L’immensa popolarità della parmigiana di pollo (“Chicken parm”) negli Stati Uniti è pienamente giustificata. È uno dei piatti più deliziosi e uno dei miei preferiti personali. In un momento in cui cerco il “comfort food”, questo è il piatto a cui mi rivolgo più spesso di qualsiasi altro. E io dubito che perfino il gourmet italiano più snob possa trovare un legittimo difetto nella troika di una buona cotoletta impanata, una buona salsa e un buon formaggio. Ma dove nacque questo piatto? La storia è molto interessante e molto complessa. Una cosa che sappiamo con certezza concreta è che la preparazione che oggi chiamiamo “parmigiana” è originaria della Sicilia. La stratificazione delle melanzane con salsa di pomodoro e formaggio non ha niente, assolutamente niente, a che fare con Parma o con il formaggio parmigiano. Nientissimo. In Italia le finestre hanno spesso le persiane in legno. La parola siciliana per persiana è parmiciana. Così, quando i siciliani impilavano strati di melanzane, salsa e formaggio, la chiamavano parmiciana. Durante l’occupazione borbonica dell’Italia meridionale (1735-1861), nel Regno delle Due Sicilie, i napoletani corruppero la parola parmiciana in parmisciana. Ulteriori corruzioni lo portarono in parmigiana. In questo periodo furono pubblicati in Italia due libri di cucina molto importanti: Il cuoco galante (1773) di Corrado e Cucina teorico-pratica (1837) di Cavalcanti. Cavalcanti diede la prima ricetta conosciuta della “Molignane a la parmisciana”: fette di melanzane fritte (ma non impanate) e condite con formaggio grattugiato, foglie di basilico e ragù oppure salsa di pomodoro senza carne. Corrado diede ricette di vari piatti che chiamò “parmegiana”. L’unica cosa che queste diverse ricette hanno in comune è che includono il formaggio parmigiano. Altrimenti, i piatti sono completamente diversi. E nessuno di loro ha niente a che fare con la procedura “parmigiana” di oggi. Ma non è la fine della storia ... A pagina 36 si legge un’affascinante ricetta. In questa ricetta Corrado lessa le orecchie di vitello, le scola e le passa nella farina, poi nell’uovo, poi in un impasto di pangrattato e parmigiano. (Niente salsa, niente stratificazione.) Cotte lesse le Orecchie del Vitello, e fatte poi freddare, s’infarinano, si tuffino nelle uova, e nel pane e parmegiano grattato s’involtino: e così in istrutto si friggono per servirle calde con petrosemolo intorno. Ah! Questa è la prima apparizione nota in un libro di cucina non solo di vitello fritto e impanato, ma è il primo esempio conosciuto del procedimento farina-uova-pangrattato. Oggi i francesi sono famosi per questo procedimento. Tuttavia la sua prima apparizione non fu in un libro di cucina francese, ma in uno italiano! Ma come siamo passati dalla parmigiana di melanzane non impanata alla parmigiana di vitello impanata? Ci voleva un po’ prima che il vitello trovasse la strada per la Sicilia. Storicamente i siciliani mangiavano così poca carne che, fino all’anno 1500 circa, non c’era alcuna parola in lingua siciliana per carne commestibile. È vero questo – la parola proprio non esisteva! Le parole càmmaru, scàmmaru e cammaràrisi – e infatti le parole napoletane càmmaro, scàmmaro e cammarà – non risalgono a più del 1500. La Sicilia alla fine scoprì il vitello. Le “cotolette alla palermitana” sono cotolette di vitello impanate. Comunque il pangrattato viene attaccato alla carne non con l’uovo ma con l’olio d’oliva. E le cotolette sono cotte in forno, non fritte. D’altronde, il pangrattato in senso generale ha un posto più prominente nella cucina siciliana che non in quella milanese, o addirittura napoletana. Originari della Sicilia sono i famosi spaghetti con la mollica di pane o gli ancora più famosi anelli di calamari impanati. Quindi, è ovvio che la Sicilia ci portò l’amore per i cibi impanati e che Napoli (non la Francia) ci portò la procedura farina-uovo-pangrattato. E mentre ci possono essere dubbi sulla provenienza della “parmigiana,” non c’è dubbio che Napoli ci abbia portato la “pizzaiola,” l’irresistibile abitudine di condire la carne con salsa e formaggio. Ma perché tutti i libri e i sito web presumono che le cotolette di vitello discendano da Milano o da Vienna? Sicuramente la Cotoletta alla Milanese e la Wiener Schnitzel hanno molto in comune. Entrambe sono composte da carne di vitello. Entrambe utilizzano il procedimento farina-uovo-pangrattato. Entrambe sono fritte. Tuttavia, c’era pochissima immigrazione negli Stati Uniti da Vienna o da Milano. Come sarebbero arrivate qui entrambe le ricette? Possiamo eliminare Vienna: gli storici sono tutti d’accordo sul fatto che le cotolette di vitello impanate viaggiassero da Milano a Vienna, non viceversa. Esistevano infatti a Milano secoli prima che gli Asburgo li scoprissero. Ci sono in realtà due cotolette alla milanese distinte. C’è la buonissima braciola di vitello, un taglio di carne più spesso, con l’osso. Poi c’è quello che viene chiamato “orecchia d’elefante,” una cotoletta disossata che viene battute fino a renderla sottile. Ovviamente la Wiener Schnitzel è una discendente della seconda. Se è vero che a Milano le cotolette di vitello impanate esistano da secoli (forse fin dal Medioevo), non c’è una spiegazione plausibile perché la parmigiana di vitello sia arrivata negli Stati Uniti da Milano. Infatti, a meno che qualcuno non scopra una ricetta farina-uovo-pangrattato in un ricettario milanese precedente a Corrado, l’unica conclusione che possiamo trarre è che i milanesi hanno imparato a fare le loro cotolette dai napoletani. Infatti, non capita spesso che la cucina milanese e quella napoletana vengano citate nella stessa frase! Comunque questa è la transizione perfetta verso lo straordinario racconto di un piatto che si chiama “Cotolette alla Napoletana,” che (inverosimilmente) nacque in Argentina (!) e (ancora più inverosimilmente) fu chiamato “Milanese alla Napoletana”! Secondo la leggenda argentina, negli anni Quaranta nel quartiere Palermo di Buenos Aires, il Ristorante Nápoli era posseduto e gestito da tale Jorge La Grotta. Un giorno, un cliente abituale entrò e ordinò la sua solita milanesa. Il cuoco, però, aveva terminato il suo turno e a provvedere fu un suo aiutante. Quest’aiutante aveva più entusiasmo che talento; bruciò un lato della cotoletta. Per rimediare al pasticcio decise di coprire la “ferita” con pomodoro, prosciutto e mozzarella, per poi passarla nel forno al fine di cuocere e fondere gli ingredienti “intrusi.” Il racconto narra che la novità piacque all’avventore e divenne una specialità del Ristorante Nápoli. Le fu dato il nome “Milanesa a la Nápoli.” Divenne il fiore all’occhiello del ristorante che a fine anni ’40, inizio anni ’50 fu il piatto più amato e richiesto. La popolarità del piatto si diffuse in tutta l’Argentina e il nome fu corrotto in “Milanese alla Napoletana”. (Questo aveva quasi senso, siccome la combinazione di salsa e formaggio ricordava una pizza.) Ora per la parte più inverosimile della storia: questa ricetta arrivò a Napoli e si affermò come un piatto popolare di nome “Cotoletta alla Napoletana”! Qui negli Stati Uniti, la parmigiana di vitello è ancora consumata in America con una certa frequenza. Comunque, è facile capire le ragioni per cui il pollo è diventato più popolare: la ragione finanziaria, la ragione dietetica e l’opposizione alla crudeltà sugli animali. Mi piace mangiare la parmigiana di pollo in un cuzzutiello, stile napoletano. Per essere chiari, a Napoli non si fa: laggiù ’o cuzzutiello si riempie con le polpette e il sugo di pummarola. Però riempito con la parmigiano di pollo, credimi è stupendo! In America ’o cuzzitiello non esiste proprio. Si usa il panino “sottomarino,” un panino cilindrico diviso longitudinalmente. A Boston questo pane si chiama “spuckie” (pronunciato “spachi”), da “spaccatella”. In ogni caso, io certamente non condono l’abitudine americana di servire la parmigiana (o la marsala, o la piccata) sopra un letto di pasta. Chiunque abbia pensato a quella stupidaggine, non posso dirvi.

The improbable history of chicken parmigiana by Leonardo Ciampa The immense popularity of Chicken parmigiana (“Chicken parm”) in the United States is fully justified. It is one of the most delicious dishes, and one of my personal favorites. In a moment when I am seeking “comfort food,” this is the dish to which I turn more often than any other. And I doubt that even the snobbiest Italian gourmet could find legitimate fault with the troika of a good breaded cutlet topped, a good sauce, and good cheese. But where on earth did this dish originate? The history is very interesting, and very complex. One thing we know with concrete certainty is that the preparation which we today call “parmigiana” originated in Sicily. Layering eggplant with tomato sauce and cheese has nothing – absolutely nothing – to do with Parma or Parmesan cheese. NOTHING. In Italy, windows often have wooden shutters called persiane. The Sicilian word for persiana is parmiciana. Thus, when Sicilians stacked layers of eggplant, sauce, and cheese, they called it “parmiciana.” During the French occupation of Southern Italy (1735-1861), in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, the Neapolitans corrupted the word “parmiciana” to “parmisciana.” Future corruptions brought it to “parmigiana.” There were two very important cookbooks published in Italy during this era: Corrado’s Il cuoco galante (1773) and Cavalcanti’s Cucina teorico-pratica (1837). Cavalcanti gives the first known recipe for “Eggplant parmisciana”: slices of eggplant, fried (but not breaded) and layered with grated cheese, basil leaves, and either a meat ragù or a meatless tomato sauce. Corrado gives recipes for various dishes that he calls “parmegiana.” The only thing any of them have in common is that they include parmesan cheese. Otherwise, the dishes are completely different. And none of them has anything to do today’s parmigiana. But that’s not the end of the story … On page 36 there is a fascinating recipe. In this recipe, Corrado boils veal’s ears, drains them, and dips them in flour, then egg, then a mixture of breadcrumbs and parmesan cheese. (No sauce, no layering.) Veal ears cooked, drained, and then cooled, floured, dipped in egg, and rolled in bread and grated Parmegiano; they are fried in lard and served hot, garnished with parsley. Aha! This is the first known appearance in a cookbook not only of fried and breaded veal, but it is the first known example of the flour-egg-breadcrumb procedure. Today the French are famous for this procedure. However its first appearance was not in a French cookbook, but in an Italian one! However, how did we get from unbreaded eggplant parm to the breaded veal parm? It took a while for veal to find its way to Sicily. Historically the Sicilians ate so little meat that, until around the year 1500, there was no word in the Sicilian language for edible meat. This is true – the word literally didn’t exist! The words càmmaru (edible meat), scàmmaru (food without meat) e cammaràrisi (to eat meat) – as well as the Neapolitan equivalents càmmaro, scàmmaro and cammarà – do not date back further than 1500. Sicily eventually discovered veal. Cotolette alla Palermitana are breaded veal cutlets. However, the breadcrumbs are stuck to the meat not with egg but with olive oil. And the cutlets are baked, not fried. Then again, breadcrumbs in a general sense are featured more prominently in Sicilian cuisine than than of Milan, or even of Naples. The famous spaghetti with breadcrumbs, or the even-more-famous breaded calamari rings, both originated in Sicily. Thus, it stands to reason that Sicily brought us the love of breaded foods, and Naples (not France) brought us the flour-egg-breadcrumb procedure. And while there may be doubts about the provenance of “parmigiana,” there is zero doubt that Naples brought us “pizzaiola,” the irresistible procedure of topping meat with sauce and cheese. But why do all the books and website assume that veal cutlets descended from either Milan or Vienna? Certainly Cotoletta alla Milanese and Wiener Schnitzel do have much in common. Both consist of veal. Both use the flour-egg-breadcrumb procedure. Both are fried. However, there was very little immigration to the United States from either Vienna or Milan. How would either recipe have arrived here? We can eliminate Vienna: historians all agree that breaded veal cutlets traveled from Milan to Vienna, not the other way around. In fact, they existed in Milan centuries before the Habsburgs discovered them. There are actually two distinct Milanese cutlets. There is the delicious veal chop, a thicker cut of meat, with the bone. Then there is what is called the “orecchia d’elefante” (“elephant’s ear”), a boneless cutlet which is pounded until thin. Obviously the Wiener Schnitzel is a descendant of the latter. While it is true that breaded veal cutlets have existed in Milan for centuries (possibly since the Middle Ages), there is no plausible explanation why veal parm would have come to the United States from Milan. In fact, unless someone discovers a flour-egg-breadcrumb recipe in a Milanese cookbook that predates Corrado, the only conclusion we can draw is that the Milanese learned to make their cutlets from the Neapolitans. Indeed, it is not often that the cuisines of Milan and Naples are mentioned in the same sentence! However that is the perfect segue to the remarkable story of a dish called “Cotolette alla Napoletana,” (“Neapolitan cutlets”), which (improbably) originated in Argentina (!), and (even more improbably) was named “Milanese alla Napoletana”! According to Argentine legend, in the 1940s, in the Palermo district of Buenos Aires, the Ristorante Nápoli was owned and operated by a certain Jorge La Grotta. One day, a regular customer entered and ordered his usual Milanese. The cook, however, had finished his shift. The Milanese was prepared by an underling. This underling had more enthusiasm than talent. He burned one side of the cutlet. To remedy the “wound,” he decided to cover it with tomato sauce, ham and mozzarella, then put it in the oven for a couple of minutes, in order to blend the added ingredients. The story goes that this new dish pleased the customer so much that it became a specialty of Nápoli Restaurant. It was called “Milanesa a la Nápoli.” It became the flagship of the restaurant and, in the late 40s, early 50s, was the most loved and requested dish. The dish’s popularity spread throughout Argentina, and the name became corrupted to “Milanese alla Napoletana.” (This almost made sense, whereas the sauce-and-cheese combination was reminiscent of a pizza.) Now for the most improbable part of the story: this recipe found its way to Naples and established itself as a popular dish called “Cotoletta alla Napoletana”! Here in the United States, Veal parm is still consumed in America with some frequency. However, it is easy to understand the reasons why chicken has become more popular: the financial reason, the dietary reason, and the opposition to animal cruelty. I like to eat chicken parmigiana in a cuzzutiello, a small loaf of crusty Neapolitan bread, excavated and filled. To be clear, in Naples, they do not do this. Over there, the cuzzutiello is filled with meatballs and sauce. However, believe me that filled with chicken Parm it is stupendous! In America the cuzzutiello does not exist. We use a submarine bread roll or sub. This role is called different things in different cities. In Boston it’s called a spuckie (from the Italian word spaccatella — spaccare means to break or split open). In any case, I certainly do not condone the American habit of serving chicken parmigiana (or Marsala, or piccata) on top of a bed of pasta. Whoever thought of that nonsense, I couldn’t tell you.

La storia del pomodoro / The story of the tomato

artecibo.com

Il pomodoro è uno dei frutti più amati e più consumati del Nuovo Mondo. Ed è nato nel Nuovo Mondo. Eppure era quasi sconosciuto fino a quando non è passato attraverso il Vecchio Mondo! (La storia di Sir Walter Raleigh scoprendo il pomodoro e riportandolo in dono alla regina Elisabetta I, definendolo un “pomo d’amore,” è una fiaba che non ha nulla a che fare con la storia né del pomodoro né del suo arrivo nelle cucine europee.) I pomodori ebbero origine probabilmente in Perù, anche se alcune fonti dicano Messico. Colombo non riportò i pomodori, ma gli esploratori europei li scoprirono nei decenni che seguirono i quattro viaggi colombiani.  Queste esplorazioni accaddero durante il Vicereame della Nuova Spagna, un grandissimo regno recentemente creato nel 1521. Nel suo periodo di massimo splendore la Nuova Spagna comprendeva tutta l’America Centrale, la maggior parte degli attuali Stati Uniti, un pezzo della Canadà, un po’ del Sud America e alcune isole. Il regno terminò esattamente 300 anni dopo (1821) con la Guerra d’indipendenza messicana e l’indipendenza centroamericana. Le ultime vestigia della Nuova Spagna furono sradicate nella guerra ispano-americana (1898). Il 10 marzo 1572, il botanico-naturalista Costanzo Felici (1525-1585) scrisse una lettera a un altro botanico-naturalista, Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522-1605): “Pomo d’oro, cosiddetto volgarmente dal suo intenso colore, overo pomo del Perù, quale o è giallo intenso overo è rosso gagliardamente.” Il medico-naturalista Pietro Andrea Mattioli (1501-1577) nella prima edizione del suo Dioscoride (1544) parlò del pomodoro giallo. Dalla seconda edizione dieci anni dopo (1554), aveva scoperto anche quel rosso: “in alcune piante rosse come sangue, in altre di color giallo d’oro.” Nel 1585, il medico-botanico Castore Durante (1529-1590) scrisse in Herbario nuovo delle specie di pomodori sia gialle che rosse, pur sapendo che “i pomi d’oro mangiansi nel medesimo modo che le melanzane con pepe, sale e olio.” Molto popolare nella Nuova Spagna era la salsa nahuana che oggi chiameremmo “salsa” (nel senso di “salsa messicana”), composta da pomodori, peperoncini, cipolle ed erbe. Il missionario francescano Bernardino de Sahagún (che era arrivato nella Nuova Spagna nel 1526), scrive di questa salsa, che lui ci dice si produceva dalle “donne Nahua.” I nahuani erano popolazioni indigene del Messico e dell’America Centrale, di cui gli Aztechi erano uno dei gruppi più grandi. Ed è molto interessante notare che la parola azteca per il pomodoro era tomatl (dalla quale venne la parola inglese). Questa “salsa” era (ed è ancora) un condimento di pomodori crudi, mangiato a temperatura ambiente. (Non parlo della salsa commerciale in vasetto che si compra oggi.) La nozione di una salsa di pomodori cotti, mangiata calda, arrivò molto lentamente in Europa. Ricordate che, per molti anni, i pomodori si credevano fossero velenosi. La prima apparenza (che conosciamo) del sugo di pomodoro in un ricettario venne da un cuoco famoso marchigiano, Antonio Latini (1642-1692). Lo scalco alla moderna fu pubblicato a Napoli in due volumi (1692 e 1694).  Vi leggiamo di una salsa di pomodoro “alla spagnola” fatta di cipolle, pomodoro, sale, olio e aceto. “Piglierai una mezza dozzina di pomadore, che sieno mature; le porrai sopra le brage, a brustolare, e dopò che saranno abbruscate, gli leverai la scorza diligentemente, e le triterai minutamente con il coltello, e v’aggiungerai cipolle tritate minute, a discrezione, peparolo [peperoncino] pure tritato minuto, serpillo [timo selvatico] in poca quantità, e mescolando ogni cosa insieme, l’accommoderai con un po’ di sale, oglio, & aceto, che sarà una salsa molto gustosa, per bollito, ò per altro.” Durante il 1500 e il 1600, l’Italia meridionale fu governata dalla Spagna. Pertanto, è facile supporre come il pomodoro abbia viaggiato dalla Spagna a Napoli. Poi arrivarono i francesi. Durante l’epoca borbonica del Regno delle Due Sicilie (1734-1860), c’era la meravigliosa impollinazione incrociata della cucina francese e quella partenopea. I francesi stavano già preparando ottimi stufati, grandi calderoni pieni di carni che cuocevano nel vino e negli aromatici per molte ore. Dai napoletani gli francesi ebbero l’idea di aggiungere pomodori a questo stufato. Poi i partenopei scoprirono che il sugo di questo stufato costituiva un ottimo condimento per la pasta. Ecco l’origine del ragù napoletano! Nel frattempo, a Spaccanapoli venne l’invenzione di quella delicatezza che si chiama la pizza. Quindi c’erano queste famose ricette utilizzando i pomodori — cioè, famosi nel Meridione. Nel Settentrione erano sconosciuti. (Credete che, tempo fa, si potesse trovare una pizzeria in Piemonte?) Poi vennero gli Anni di Ellis Island, durante i quali la pizza e il sugo domenicale conquistarono la nazione. Più tardi, per soddisfare i turisti americani, i settentrionali aprirono pizzerie. Così il pomodoro entrò nel Nord Italia. Ma non dal Sud Italia. Non dalla Spagna. Dagli Stati Uniti d’America!  Naturalmente, le altre nazioni europee seguirono l’esempio. Oggi potete mangiare la pizza e la pasta a Venezia o ad Amburgo o a Rotterdam. Questa è la storia di come il pomodoro viaggiò dalle Americhe, in Spagna, a Napoli, negli Stati Uniti e poi in tutta l’Italia e l’Europa!

The tomato is one of the most beloved, and most consumed, fruits in the New World. And it originated in the New World. Yet it was almost unknown until after it passed through the Old World! (The story of Sir Walter Raleigh discovering the tomato and bringing it back to Queen Elizabeth I as a gift, calling it an "apple of love" ("pomme d’amour"), is a fable which has nothing to do with the history of the tomato or its arrival in European kitchens.) Tomatoes originated probably in Peru, though some sources say Mexico. Columbus did not bring back tomatoes, but the European explorers discovered them in the decades which followed Columbus's four voyages.  These explorations took place during the Viceroyalty of New Spain, a very large kingdom recently created in 1521.  In its heyday New Spain encompassed all of Central America, most of the present-day United States, some of Canada, a bit of South America, and several islands.  The kingdom ended exactly 300 years later (1821) with the Mexican War of Independence and Central American Independence.  The last vestiges of New Spain were eradicated in the Spanish-American War (1898). On March 10, 1572, the botanist-naturalist Costanzo Felici (1525-1585) wrote a letter to another botanist-naturalist, Ulisse Aldrovandi (1522-1605): "Golden apple, so called because of its intense color. Also called Peru Apple.  It is either an intense yellow or a fierce red." The physician-naturalist Pietro Andrea Mattioli (1501-1577) in the first edition of his Dioscorides (1544) spoke of the yellow tomato. By the second edition ten years later (1554), he he had also discovered the red variety: "in some plants red as blood, in others golden yellow." In 1585, the physician-botanist Castore Durante (1529-1590) wrote in Herbario nuovo about both the yellow and red species of tomatoes, also knowing that the "golden tomatoes were eaten in the same way as eggplants, with salt, pepper, and oil." Very popular in New Spain was the Nahuan sauce which today we would call "salsa," consisting of tomatoes, chili peppers, onions, and herbs.   The Franciscan missionary Bernardino de Sahagún (who had arrived in New Spain in 1526), writes of this salsa, which he said was made by "Nahua women."  The Nahuas were indigenous peoples from Mexico and Central America, of which the Aztec were one of the largest groups.  And it is very interesting to note that the Aztec word for this beloved fruit was tomatl. This "salsa" was (and still is) a condiment of raw tomatoes, eaten at room temperature.  (I'm not talking about the commercial jarred salsa that you buy today.) The notion of a sauce of cooked tomatoes, eaten hot, came very slowly to Europe. Remember that, for many years, tomatoes were believed to be poisonous. The first appearance (that we know of) in a cookbook of tomato sauce came from a famous chef from Le Marche, Antonio Latini (1642-1692). Lo scalco alla moderne ("The modern servant") was published in Naples in two volumes (1692 and 1694). We read about a "Spanish-style" tomato sauce made with onions, tomatoes, salt, oil and vinegar. "You will pick half a dozen tomatoes, which are ripe; you will put them on the grill, to brown, and after they are seared, you will carefully remove the skin, and mince it with the knife, and add minced onions, at your discretion, chili pepper also minced, a small quantity of serpillo [wild thyme], and mixing everything together, you will season it with a little salt, oil, & vinegar, which will be a very tasty sauce, for boiled meat, or for something else." During the 1500s and 1600s, Southern Italy was ruled by Spain.  Thus, it is easy to surmise how the tomato traveled from Spain to Naples. Then came the French.  During the Bourbon era of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (1734-1860), there was the wonderful cross-pollination of the French and Neapolitan cuisines.  The French were already making great stews, large cauldrons filled with meats which cooked in wine and aromatics for many hours.  From the Neapolitans the French got the idea to add tomatoes to this stew.  Then the Neapolitans discovered that the gravy from this stew made a fine condiment for pasta.  Thus the origin of the Neapolitan ragoût! In the meantime, in Spaccanapoli came the invention of that delicacy known as pizza. So you had these famous recipes using tomatoes — famous, that is, in Southern Italy.  In Northern Italy they were unknown. (Do you think that, back in the day, you could find a pizzeria in Piemonte?) Then came the Ellis Island Years, during which pizza and the Sunday sauce conquered the nation. Later, to satisfy the American tourists, the Northern Italians opened pizzerias.  Thus the tomato entered Northern Italy.  But not from Southern Italy.  Not from Spain.  From the United States of America!  Naturally, the other countries of Europe followed suit.  Today you can eat pizza and pasta in Venice or in Hamburg or in Rotterdam. This is the story of how the tomato traveled from the Americas, to Spain, to Naples, to the United States, and then throughout all of Italy and Europe!

Una bella pizza dal ristorante Belli di Mamma, a ... Budapest! (Foto: Mudra László)
A beautiful pizza from the restaurant Belli di Mamma, in ... Budapest! (Photo: Mudra László) 

Buon compleanno, Giacomo Orefice!

Buon compleanno, GIACOMO OREFICE, compositore ebreo-italiano dell’epoca veristica, nato a Vicenza il 27 agosto 1865, morto a Milano il 22 dicembre 1922. Scrisse opere fra le quali Chopin fu la più famosa. (Si cantò anche in Polonia, in traduzione polacca.) Nell’opera, Orefice si avvalse delle melodie di Chopin. Ma questo non diminisce il fatto che Orefice fu un compositore capacissimo che poté scrivere la bella musica. Ed ecco! Ascolta! La voce di Ferruccio Tagliavini! Chi oggi è degno di sciogliere il legaccio de’ calzari di Tagliavini?! Godete questa voce estasiante, e la voce bellissima di sua moglie, Pia Tassinari. “Sera ineffabile” dal IIº atto di Chopin. San Francisco Opera Orchestra, diretta dal mº Gaetano Merola (registrazione dal vivo, 16 October 1949).

Happy birthday, GIACOMO OREFICE, Jewish-Italian composer of the Verismo era, born in Vicenza 27 August 1865, died in Milan 22 December 1922.  He wrote operas, of which Chopin was the most famous.  (It was even sung in Poland, in a Polish translation.) In the opera, Orefice avails himself of Chopin's melodies. But this does not diminish the fact that Orefice was a very capable composer who could write beautiful music.  And behold! The voice of Ferruccio Tagliavini! Who today is worthy of loosening his sandal straps?! Enjoy this ravishing voice, and the beautiful voice of his wife, Pia Tassinari. "Sera ineffabile" from the second act of the opera Chopin. The San Francisco Opera Orchestra, conducted by Gaetano Merola (live recording, 16 October 1949).

What is Southern Italy?

(Cliccate qua per la versione italiana di questo post.)

At the Papal-Bourbon frontier.
At left, Falvaterra, with the crossed keys and the year the marker was installed.
At right, San Giovanni Incarico, with the fleur-de-lys and the number of the marker.
Photos: Wikipedia.it

Seeing as this blog claims to be a blog about Southern Italy, the question came to my mind: What is Southern Italy?

I discovered that there is no one response.

To say that Lazio does not belong to the South is too simplistic.  Historically, many towns in Lazio were part of the South. But on the other hand, to define the South strictly according to the Bourbon borders – i.e., the borders of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies – is too simplistic in another way.  It excludes Sardinia.  And it excludes Pontecorvo and Benevento, two Papal enclaves.  How can you say that Benevento isn't in the South? 

Therefore, I decided that my definition of the South will be: all of the land that is south of the northern border of the Two Sicilies, plus Sardinia. 

But where is this border?

It's a little complicated.  To draw this border, we have to dissect the provinces of Latina, Frosinone, and Rieti.

Let's start on the Mediterranean side.  Sperlonga is a coastal town about 15 km west of Gaeta.  Bordering Sperlonga on the west is another coastal town, Terracina.  Terracina always resisted French domination and remained part of the Papal States.  Therefore, we know where to begin our border: between Terracina and Sperlonga. 

Sperlonga
Photo: Wikipedia.it

Traveling northeast from Sperlonga, one arrives at Monte San Biagio, then Fondi, then Lènola, then Pico. (We have left the province of Latina, and we are now in the province of Frosinone.) North of Pico is San Giovanni Incarico. San Giovanni was flanked by the Papal States.  Beyond the western border is Falvaterra, a Papal town, and beyond the eastern border is Pontecorvo, a Papal enclave. North of San Giovanni is Isoletta (west of which is Ceprano, always a staunchly Papal town). North of Isoletta is Colfelice, then Arce, Fontana Liri, Castelliri, Isola del Liri, Sora, and Pescosolido. (West of Fontana Liri are Strangolagalli and Monte San Giovanni Campano, both Papal.)

Isola del Liri, the Great Waterfall
Photo: Wikipedia.it

After Pescosolido, we enter Balsorano. Now things become much easier. We are now in Abruzzo, in the province of L’Aquila. Between Balsorano and Carsoli, the border is very clear, following perfectly the modern border between Lazio and Abruzzo.

After Carsoli, we leave Abruzzo and re-enter Lazio. Once again, the border becomes complicated, dissecting the province of Rieti. After Tufo Alto (a frazione of Carsoli), the first town we reach is Pescorocchiano. (The three towns in Rieti west of Carsoli – Turania, Collalto Sabino, and Nespolo – were all Papal.) From Pescorocchiano we arrive at Fiamignano, Petrella Salto, Cittaducale, Lugnano, Cantalice, Pian de’ Valli, and Leonessa – all towns in Rieti. (West of Leonessa is Rivodutri, a Papal town.)

Leonessa
Photo: © Simone Telari (Flickr.com)

From Leonessa, all the way to the Adriatic, the border is once more very clear, following the modern borders.  From Leonessa  (specifically, the frazione Fuscello), we follow the Umbria-Lazio border and the Marche-Lazio border.  Then, we are once again in Abruzzo, in the province of Teramo, and we follow the Marche-Abruzzo border to the Adriatic.

At the coast we are at Martinsicuro. North of us is Porto d’Ascoli, a Papal town.

Martinsicuro
Photo: Flickr.com

We've done it! Unfortunately we had to dissect three provinces to do it, but we did it: we established our border of Southern Italy!

Map © Leonardo Ciampa

Today in history

(Cliccate qua per la versione italiana di questo post.)

Milano, S. Maria presso S. Celso (photo by L. Ciampa, 12 August 2011)

August 15 is Ferragosto, a popular holiday instituted by Emperor Augustus in the year 18 B.C. (the Feriae Augusti, or, “Augustus's Vacation”).  It coincides with the Catholic feast of the Assumption of Mary and with the Orthodox feast of the Dormition of Mary.

Two years ago I was in Milan during the Ferragosto. The city was empty. Empty. I had to play a concert the evening of August 14 in this abandoned city. I had little hope for a large audience. They arranged 300 chairs and printed 300 programs. 400 people came!

August 15 is the anniversary of the death of a rather interesting Southern Italian.   Niccolò Piccinni (not the composer) was born in Castelsaraceno, a little town in the province of Potenza (Basilicata).  He lived in Naples, where he died on 15 August 1768.  He was a judge, but he was also a talented poet. He wrote poems in Italian, Latin, and Neapolitan. One of his poems was admired by Charles III. (During Piccinni's lifetime, prior to becoming King of Spain, Charles was King of the Two Sicilies.)

Such a capable poet should have written more poetry, a fact that even Piccinni himself regretted.

Chillo io, che grolia aggio d’avè mbrogliato

Sempe na Vicaria, mbroglià doveva

Certo primmo lo Boja ch’è chiammato

La justizia mperzona, e lo faceva.

Lo lodo io mo pe non esserle sgrato

Ca ncuollo e mane soje non me metteva

Eppure fetenno io d’essere acciso

Avria avuto pe isso a esse mpiso.

An interview with Michelangelo Verso, Jr.

(Cliccate qua per la versione italiana di questo post.)

Father & son, on Copacabana Beach (Rio de Janeiro).
Photo: Michelangelo Verso, Jr.

It seems very natural that, every so often, Leonardo & Michelangelo should come together!

One of my favorite, and I mean FAVORITE, Sicilian songs is “Vitti ’na crozza.” The first person in the world ever to record it was the famous singer from Palermo, Michelangelo Verso. I feel very honored that his son, Michelangelo Verso, Jr., has agreed to do an interview with me for Pensieri Meridionali. (The following interview has been translated from Italian to English.)

* * *

Michelangelo Verso, Jr.

MV: First of all, thank you for this interview and for the honor and the opportunity that it gives me to recount a small part of my father's career, and to share with you the facts surrounding “Vitti ’na crozza,” of which my father made the world-premiere recording, in its original version, for CETRA in 1951.

LC: How is it that he was chosen to be the first person to sing it? 

MV: I will share with you the following information from my biography of my father (which I still have to publish ...) entitled: “Michelangelo Verso, un tenore, un Siciliano nel mondo, il primo interprete di ‘‘Vitti ’na crozza’’”.

My father was a soloist in the Coro Polifonico della Conca d’Oro, directed by Maestro Carmelo Giacchino, which in those days performed regularly at the Temple of Concord in Agrigento and at the Teatro Pirandello for the sagra (religious feast), "Mandorlo in Fiore" ("Almond Trees in Bloom"). As a soloist from within the group, he performed Sicilian folk songs. One evening, during one of these feasts, Maestro Franco Li Causi heard him.  He immediately liked his clear, limpid, ringing, and incisive voice, as well as his interpretations.  He attended the feast because previously he had heard about my father's prior successes: a radio performance for the EIAR; appearances on the RAI radio shows "Rosso e nero" and "Chicchirichì"; the concert with Beniamino Gigli at the Teatro Massimo in Palermo (in which Gigli himself preselected him to participate); the various operas in which he had sung principal roles; the operatic scholarship that he had won from the Accademia Chigiana in Siena; his participation in the big concert commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of Verdi's death in the St. Francis's Basilica in Siena, with orchestra, chorus, and soloists conducted by Maestro Andrea Morosini; and other success from which my father had derived a certain fame and notoriety.

Beniamino Gigli & Michelangelo Verso, Sr.
Photo: michelangeloverso.com

Franco Li Causi and his brother Salvatore (Totò) had already made several recordings (tarantellas and mazurkas) for the record label CETRA of Torino; therefore, they were already rather well-known and appreciated, and not only in Sicily.  They asked my father if he wanted to record with them several songs that they had composed.  Among the songs that they showed him was "Vitti ’na crozza," which Franco Li Causi had recently composed for the sound track of the Pietro Germi film "Il cammino della Speranza", with Raf Vallone and Elena Varzi. After my father heard the songs, he agreed, and they scheduled the recording dates at the CETRA studios in Torino. Thus in October, 1951, my father recorded, for the first time in recording history, "Vitti ’na Crozza".  However, for the first recording, my father suggested changing a couple of words of the text. He wanted to change "Lu vivu chiama e la morti arrispunni" to "U vivu chiama e u morto ‘unn’ arrispunni," which in his opinion sounded better.  Franco Li Causi agreed and very willingly made the change.  The accompaniment was comprised of only three instruments: Franco Li Causi on mandolin, Totò Li Causi on guitar, and on double bass a musician they brought in from the Orchestra Angelini. The song had a great success. The song remains, to this day, one of the most historic, symbolic and meaningful songs of the Sicilian musical tradition.  Li Causi's other songs that my father sang, recorded for CETRA during the same period, were "Notte sul mare," "Dolce sabato," "Ci rivedremo in costiera," "Sospirato tango," and "Ardore."

LC: Describe and contrast your father's two recordings of "Vitti ’na crozza" (1951 & 1963).

MV: My father's two recordings of "Vitti ’na crozza", 1951 and 1963, were completely different, recorded during two different technological eras.  The 1951 recording was a 78 r.p.m. disc made by CETRA in Torino, while the 1963 recording was a 45 r.p.m. disc, recorded by PHONOTYPE in Naples.  The only thing they had in common was that they were each recorded in a single take. Therefore, they may be called "live" recordings.  In the first recording the music was arranged by Franco Li Causi, while the second, more modern arrangement was by Maestro Mario Festa.  Even the two accompaniments were totally different.  The first version had only mandolin, acoustic guitar, and double bass, while the second version had electric guitar, drum set, tambourine, saxophone, and flute.  This second version of  "Vitti ’na crozza" was part of a series of six songs that were all recorded with the same ensemble (Femar) and arranger.  The other songs were: "Ciuri, ciuri", "A lu mercatu", "Tutte si maritaru", "Giorno di nozze" and "Canto la mia canzone". These last two were composed, words and music, by my father. "Giorno di nozze" he dedicated to me, his son, and "Canto la mia canzone" was to an extent an autobiographical song, recounting part of his own life. These songs that were recorded on single 45 disks for PHONOTYPE were destined for the jukeboxes that in those days were very common in cafés and discotheques. On the front of the sleeve of each of these records, one could clearly see a tagliando (a rectangular area, like a coupon that one would cut out), on which was printed the disk's two titles (side A and B), together with the name of the singer. This was so that the jukebox installers could easily cut out these titles and insert them into the jukebox. Obviously this is another reason why the arrangements of these songs were done in a more commercial way, appropriate for the "jukebox audience," i.e., those who put coins in the jukebox and selected the singles that they wanted to hear.

LC: Explain the origin of the coda “la-la-la-LE-lu-la-LA-la-la-LE-lu-la-LA,” etc., which they tacked onto the song later, in the '60s.

MV: I believe that it was Rosanna Fratello, in the late ’60s, who first recorded a 45 of the "Modified Vitti ’na crozza", that is, with this coda tacked on.  In my opinion the recording labels did it for purely commercial reasons, to make the song more catchy, dancelike, "happy," in the hopes that the song would sell more records.  All this in absolute contradiction and opposition to the meaning of the text!  Many have considered this a real sacrilege ...

LC:  There is much confusion over the true meaning of the word  “cannuni.” Does it mean a cannon, a tower, a mine shaft ...?

MV:  I must say that the meaning of the word “cannuni” has made more than a few people scratch their heads ...

It was a friend of my father, the writer and singer-songwriter Sara Favarò, who wrote various articles on this topic, in order to research it in a thorough way and to learn the true meaning of this ambiguous word.  Thanks to her research, and also to a newspaper article that appeared in L'ORA on February 2, 1978, written by the journalist Gabriello Montemagno (an article that my father saved, containing the reminiscences of  Franco Li Causi and Giuseppe Cibardo Bisaccia) one can reconstruct how the song was born and the true meaning of the word in question.

In 1950 in Agrigento, the director Pietro Germi was filming  "Il cammino della speranza" ("Path of Hope"), and he asked Franco Li Causi if in his repertoire of Sicilian songs there was one with a happy-tragic-sentimental theme that he could use in his film.  Franco Li Causi let him hear some of his compositions, but none of them appealed to him.  However, the director invited him to appear the next day on the set in Favara (a town near Agrigento).  It was there than an old miner, Giuseppe Cibardo Bisaccia, recited to the director a poem that he knew from memory: "Vitti ’na crozza". Pietro Germi immediately liked the meaning of the poem and asked Franco Li Causi if he'd like to set these verses to music for the film. 

At this point we know how the words and the music were born, but the mystery around the meaning of the word  "cannuni" remains to be solved.

Our friend Sara Favarò, after much thorough research and study, discovered some very interesting things on the topic.  Here I share only a part of her vast, detailed research, contained in her book, "Il Mito" (Rome: Edizione del Giana, 2011) in the chapter “Vitti ’na crozza” (pp. 10-28).

Few people know that in the Sicilian mines, the term cannuni, meaning a "big mouth," referred to the trap door which was the entrance of the mine.  A big mouth that swallowed men into its depths and, sometimes, did not return them to the living ... There is no doubt that the skull mentioned in the song is in a desperate search for peace for its soul, unattainable until a merciful hand reunites it with the rest of its mortal remains, rings the death bell, and celebrates a Mass in his memory.  Up to the middle of the last century in Italy, respectful burials were denied to certain categories of people. Suicides, homicides, and –-- incredible but true --– actors were permitted neither a funeral Mass in a church nor an interment in a consecrated burial ground. Therefore, people in these categories were buried in the "unconsecrated" earth. And in certain regions of Italy, Sicily being one of them, the sacraments were forbidden, even to miners who perished following an accident! For this last category, with respect to all the other categories to which the church forbade proper funerals, it was even worse, because frequently their remains could not be retrieved and remained buried in the bowels of the earth. In the case of a mining explosion, the remains were all the more tattered. There are various facts related to the solfataras (holes in the earth) that cause us to stretch out our theory and state that this song is about these miners' sad destiny. Men and children for whom life offered only darkness. They left for work when the sun had not yet risen and returned home when the sun had already set. A life of darkness! And one certainly cannot speak of respect for the death of these "poor Christs," apart from the Catholic religious institution. Men who often remained crushed and killed inside the mines, in that bottom of the world so well illustrated by Christian iconography where the middle of the earth is designated as the location of Hell! For the miners who had the bad luck of dying, squashed like a mouse, the death bell was not rung (a custom that was later changed, in recent decades, for the lives of the miners). There are certain facts which cause us to exclude the possibility that the song refers to the war. Even in cases where the soldiers remained unknown and unburied, for them no priest has ever denied the death knell or the celebration of the Mass.

Obviously we must thank Sara Favarò for this thorough research, which has uncovered the true meaning of this poem that had always remained a mystery.

LC: How is it that in the first recording of 1951, on the disk is written "Michele Verso" instead of "Michelangelo"?

MV: Here, a bit of unintentional confusion was created.  My father was officially named  Michelangelo Verso, but when he recorded those songs in 1951, CETRA advised him to put a shorter name on the disks that would be more easily recognized and remembered. So my father agreed to use his familiar name, Michele Verso. But in 1952 when he made records for FONIT in Milan, they preferred to use his full name.  The same happened in 1955 with all of the disks that he recorded for COLUMBIA in Mexico and in 1963 for PHONOTYPE in Napoli, while when he was in the United States, often on the concert posters they shortened his name to "Michael," "Mike," or "Michael Angelo." And in Naples they used still another variante; I still have a poster from 1952 where my father appears in a vocal concert with the name "Angelo Verso," listed together with Mario Abbate, Aurelio Fierro, Di Gilio, Nino Marletti, Franco Ricci, and Ennio Romani.

* * *

Now let us listen to Vitti ’na crozza, sung by Michelangelo Verso, Sr.

(1) 1^st Version (1951) (world-premiere recording)


(2) 2^nd Version (1963)


For contrast, listen to another recording (singer unknown) with the "sacrilegious" coda.

Today in history ...

Today marks the 350th anniversary of the birth of the Bolognese composer and violinist, Tomaso Antonio Vitali. His most famous work is the Chaconne in G minor. Here is a stupendous interpretation of it by the legendary Jascha Heifetz, accompanied by the great American organist Richard Ellsasser (recorded August 4, 1950, at Bridges Hall, Pomona College, Claremont, CA.)

The Story of America (1920)

(Cliccate qua per la versione italiana di questo post.)

This morning, while I was organizing one of my bookcases, I found this volume, quintessentially Italian-American — bilingual, in fact. The Story of America / La Storia dell’America by Alberto Pecorini was published here in Boston in the year 1920.  Italian on the left, English on the right.  With great pleasure I share an excerpt from it with you.

DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF THE AMERICAN CONTINENT

When the Turks captured the city of Constantinople in the year 1453 and became masters of the eastern Mediterranean, the decadence of the maritime cities of Italy began: Venice, Genoa, Pisa and Amalfi, which had become very wealthy during the middle ages, by reason of trade with the East.

The nations of western Europe, Spain, France, England and Portugal, which had seaports on the Atlantic, began to consider the possibility of exploring this vast ocean, which was then entirely unknown beyond the Canary Islands to the south and Iceland to the north.

The opinion of some of the most daring navigators of the time was that, by sailing towards the west, one might reach the eastern coast of Asia, visited a century before by the Venetian navigator, Marco Polo, and thus it would be possible to reestablish the trade between Europe and Asia, which had been interrupted by the Turkish conquests.

Of these navigators the most persevering was Christopher Columbus, a Genoese, who, after having tried in vain to secure ships in his own country, made his way from court to court in the principal countries of Europe where he was opposed and ridiculed by the scientists of that time. At last he succeeded in persuading Queen Isabella of Spain to give him three ships, with a crew of one hundred and twenty men and provisions for one year, with which he sailed from the Spanish port of Palos on August 3, 1492. After ten weeks of sailing toward the west, during the night of October 12, 1492, Columbus saw a distant fire from the poop of his own ship Santa Maria, and the following morning land was seen. It was an island and Columbus named it San Salvador, taking possession of it in the name of the King of Spain. After having visited the coasts of Cuba and Hayti [sic], Columbus returned to Europe where he was covered with honors. He made in all four voyages for the King of Spain; during the third he discovered the mainland of South America. He was assailed on all sides by the envy and greed of adventurers and court officials; he died poor and almost forgotten, without knowing what enormous influence over the destiny of mankind his discovery was bound to have.

The sovereigns of Europe began immediately to prepare ships and to send men to take possession of the new lands of the West, which were supposed to be very rich in gold and precious stones, and their rivalry was the cause of the first explorations of the American continent. The Tuscan navigator, Americus Vespucius, in the service, at different times, of the kings of Portugal and Spain, discovered, the year after Columbus, and explored the coast of the South American continent, especially of Brazil, and it is from Americus that the name America is derived. The Venetian navigator, John Cabot, in the service of the King of England, was the first to explore, in 1498, the coast of North America from Labrador to the region of New England. The Florentine navigator, John da Verrazzano, by order of the King of France, explored, in 1534, the coast of Canada and as far south as New York bay.

These discoveries and explorations did not serve, however, any other purpose than that of establishing the rights of dominion of the various sovereigns of Europe over the new lands. Nobody thought that the real wealth of the American continent was to be derived from tilling the soil and through colonization; captains and adventurers came, with their armed men, to seek for gold and silver and the Spanish conquests in South America especially were made for this purpose.

ENGLISH COLONIZATION IN NORTH AMERICA

More than a century passed after John Cabot's first voyage of exploration, before any attempt at colonization was made in North America by the English government. At last in the year 1606 the King of England, James I, authorized the organization of two companies for settling in America. These two companies were called the London Company and the Plymouth Company. The first was to colonize the territory from the mouth of the Potomac River to Florida and the second the territory from the mouth of the Hudson River to Canada.  These boundaries were changed by successive charters, but they covered the coast from the settlements in the South to the French in the North. The territory assigned to the London Company was called Virginia (after the "Virgin Queen" Elizabeth of England), and it was agreed that the emigrants settled there should be considered English citizens resident in America, and should, therefore, enjoy all the rights which they possessed in the mother country.

On New Year's Day 1607, the first emigrants, one hundred and five in number, left London to go to Virginia, under the leadership of Captain John Smith. Having reached their destination, they settled by the James River, named for the King of England, where they founded the town of Jamestown, the first settlement by the English in the territory which is now the United States.

Unfortunately these emigrants were not agriculturists; they had come to America to make their fortune quickly and go back to England. Finding themselves without food, they had to depend on the help of the Indians, who, thanks to the ability of Captain Smith, did not destroy the new colony. The first settlers of Jamestown were joined by others in a few years, and when it was found that the soil of Virginia was well adapted to the cultivation of tobacco, which had begun to be highly prized in Europe, the future of the colony was assured. After 1616 the cultivation of tobacco constituted the principal source of wealth for the colonists.

It became common for many sons of English noblemen and gentlemen to ask and obtain land grants in Virginia and to move to the new country. Usually they established themselves along some river, where ships could come directly from England to load tobacco and other colonial products and to deliver the manufactured goods, of which the settlers were in need. These plantations were very large and the houses distant from one another.

The sudden agricultural success of the colonists of Virginia made them feel acutely the need of cheap labor. The laborers who came from England were not sufficient; and besides, those who immigrated into Virginia as laborers very soon found the way to become themselves owners of land, and, in their turn, were in need of laborers. So it happened in the year 1619 there was brought to the coast of Virginia the first cargo of negro slaves. These were bought on the coast of Guinea in Africa at a price which would be equivalent to-day [1920] to a little more than a dollar a head, and the colonists of Virginia paid to the slave merchants the same price which was then given for a good horse.

In this way a new people came into existence throughout the territory of the London Company, free and courageous. Little by little they became rich; their great drawback was that there existed in their midst the institution of slavery, which, on account of the need of labor, was sanctioned by the law.

In the meantime the Plymouth Company had been considering the way to colonize the territory granted to it. In the year 1620 it was offered the opportunity of establishing a colony of English settlers. These belonged to a company of people known by the name of Pilgrims. During the reign of James I these people had united and had affirmed their independence of the official Church of England, holding the principle that the government of the church should not be monopolized by the hierarchy, but should depend upon the will of the people, as expressed freely and democratically in their congregations. On account of these opinions, the Pilgrims had been compelled to leave England and to take refuge in Holland in 1608, where they had been permitted to conduct worship in their own way.

The exiled Pilgrims did not like, however, to remain among foreigners and therefore they proposed to emigrate to America and found a colony under the sovereignty of the King of England, in which church as well as civil government should be freely administered according to their ideas. So it happened that they left Holland in July, 1620, and went to Plymouth in England, and from that seaport they sailed on board the ship Mayflower, for America, reaching the coast of Cape Cod in the present State of Massachusetts at the end of November.

Finding that the coast was not sufficiently protected from the winds, and that the land was not fertile, they crossed the bay and landed finally on December 21, 1620, on the spot where now is the town of Plymouth. Before landing they got together and signed a covenant pledging themselves to submit to the laws which should be passed by vote of the majority in the assembly of the freemen, who must be church members; in which assembly, according to democratic principles, all the ordinances necessary for public order and for the peaceful development of the colony should be discussed and approved.

The Pilgrims were as a rule poorer than the English colonists who landed in Virginia, but intellectually and morally they were much superior to them and all through the history of the United States their influence has been felt more deeply than that of any other immigrant element. Having come not to get rich and go back to the mother country, but to establish a free and well governed society in America, they went immediately and willingly to work and steadily developed their organization, being favored by the fact that their leaders, instead of being adventurers, were pious men devoted to the public good. The first winter of the new colony was very severe; almost one half of the Pilgrims died, and among them, the first governor, John Carver. To protect themselves from possible attacks by the Indians, the men organized a militia, but the Indians did not prove to be enemies of the new colonists. In the spring of the year 1621 Governor Bradford, who had been elected to succeed Carver, signed with Massasoit, the chief of the Indians of the region, a treaty of peace and friendship, which remained in force for half a century. The Pilgrims were soon followed by other English immigrants, who were called Puritans, who were also opposed to the government and doctrines of the Church of England. More than a thousand of these people came over, with horses, cattle and agricultural implements of all kinds. The first party settled under Governor Endicott, at Salem, 1628; a second party under the leadership of John Winthrop founded the town of Boston in 1630.

In time Pilgrims and Puritans were joined together in the same commonwealth with the same democratic form of government. In the center of every village there was the meeting house for the town meeting, which was also used as a church; and generally as a school; around it there were built the houses of the settlers and in later days a school. The severity of the climate contributed to make the colonists more united in the North, while the mildness of the climate in Virginia allowed the colonists to spread over much larger territory. At first only church members were admitted to the town meeting; but as soon as the number of settlements increased, it became impossible to assemble them all at the same time and place; therefore a representative government was inaugurated, each community electing its representatives; and thereby all the colonists were able to take part in public life by the votes of their representatives, independently of their church connections or affiliations. In this way after having affirmed the principle of democracy, the colonists adopted the principle of complete religious liberty, though they did not put it into practice as regarded Quakers and other sects.

In 1635 three thousand immigrants arrived from England and as there was no more free land in eastern Massachusetts, some of them settled in the fertile valley of the Connecticut River and there they founded the three towns of Hartford, Wethersfield, and Windsor. In 1639 these three towns united under one government and adopted a covenant or constitution, which is one of the early examples of a written constitution for a democratic government. One was granted by the London Company to Virginia, 1621, another was the covenant drawn up by the Pilgrims on the Mayflower.

In this way the English colonists continued developing themselves in the territory at present known as New England, between the French, who had established themselves in Canada in 1608, and the Dutch, who had settled along the Hudson River in 1623. For fear of being injured by these two rivals of England, the English settlers decided to unite the various colonies into a kind of defensive federation and their representatives met in Boston in 1643, when they signed a pact of federation, which may be considered as the first step towards American union.

The climate and the geographical position of New England did not favor agriculture as much as industry. The abundance of water power and timber contributed to its development. Fishing was very profitable and a great trade in salted fish was established from the beginning, both with the other colonies on the seaboard and with Europe and the West Indies.

When the English colonies both in the North and in the South were beginning to prosper, a new immigrant element came from England and settled in the central section of the Atlantic coast. These new immigrants were called Quakers and belonged to a religious sect which originated in England, where they were persecuted on account of their peculiar ideas. The Quakers were, however, a people rigidly honest and hardworking; they believed that all men should be absolutely equal and therefore that titles of nobility should not exist; they used with all people "thee" or "thou" in addressing them. They were peaceful to the extent that they refused to pay taxes if the money was to be used in making war. They led a pious life and they considered it a crime to use an oath in court or in any other circumstance. In their private life they were guided by the precepts of the Bible, which they interpreted in a rather literal and primitive way. During the reign of Charles II, William Penn, the younger son of an English admiral well esteemed at the court of England, was converted to the doctrines of this sect. Upon agreement with Penn the King consented to cede to him, in place of a certain sum due him by the government, a large tract of land in America, to the west of the Delaware River, that he might establish there a colony of Quakers. The colony was started in the year 1682 on this territory, which was given the name of Pennsylvania and in the following year the town of Philadelphia was founded. On the east bank of the river was a flourishing colony of Swedes, Welsh and some English which was sometimes assigned to New York and sometimes to Pennsylvania and became known later as New Jersey.

Although Penn, as the proprietor of the colony, was appointed its governor and had a certain influence upon the laws, yet from the start a democratic form of government was established and, in general, all public matters were discussed and approved by the representatives of the people. The peaceful disposition and the industry of the Quakers enabled them to maintain good relations with the Indians and soon colonists began to come to Pennsylvania from Sweden, Wales, Germany and Holland. The fertility of the soil and the most favorable geographical position made the extraordinary development of Pennsylvania possible, and Philadelphia soon became one of the largest towns of America.

On the south of Pennsylvania, east of the Potomac River and on both sides of Chesapeake Bay, the colony of Maryland was already flourishing. This colony had been established in 1634 by Lord Baltimore, an eminent English Roman Catholic, who, in order to find a refuge for the Catholics (who were persecuted in England after the Protestant reformation), obtained from King Charles I in 1632 a charter authorizing him to settle with Catholic colonists the territory about Chesapeake Bay. The rights accorded by the King to Lord Baltimore, as proprietor of the new colony, were very important. He had even the right to coin money and it was established that the colonists should not be taxed in any way without the consent of their representatives. From the beginning, religious liberty for all sects existed in this colony of Maryland. In the early years of the Seventeenth Century, Holland, which was then a great naval and commercial power and the strongest rival of England on the seas, sent the navigator, Henry Hudson, to explore the American coast to try to find a northwest sea way to Asia. Hudson sailed up the river, which now bears his name, to the point where is now the city of Albany, where he built a fort and established a trading post with the Indians, whom he treated well.

In 1623 a company organized in Holland for trade with the West Indies began to send its first colonists to America. Some of these established themselves along the Delaware River, others at the mouth of the Hudson River, on Long Island and on the Island of Manhattan.

In 1626 Peter Minuit, governor of these small colonies that the Dutch government had called New Netherlands, bought from the Indians for merchandise of the value of about twenty-four dollars the land of the island of Manhattan and there founded the town of New Amsterdam, which is now New York.

The Dutch, however, had neither the intention nor the possibility of settling the territory claimed by them. Their settlements were made for trading posts for furs and other raw products brought in by the Indians.

After thirty-eight years of life, in 1664 New Amsterdam was still a small village, inhabited mostly by Dutch traders. In the year 1664 the King of England, Charles II, during an interval in the wars between England and Holland, sent a fleet to occupy New Amsterdam, claiming the right to this country derived from the explorations of John Cabot. Having conquered the territory of the New Netherlands he gave it to his brother the Duke of York and it was called New York, a name which was also taken by the small Dutch town, destined to become the greatest city of the American continent.

The territory that formed North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia was owned by the English; the Scotch and the Protestant Irish settled the first State, while to Georgia and South Carolina came many Huguenots, the French Protestants, to escape the persecution in France which followed the revolution of the Edict of Nantes in 1685.

These then were the thirteen colonies: MASSACHUSETTS, NEW HAMPSHIRE, RHODE ISLAND, CONNECTICUT, NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY, DELAWARE, PENNSYLVANIA, MARYLAND, VIRGINIA, NORTH and SOUTH CAROLINA and GEORGIA. The land which was later Maine, was part of Massachusetts and the territory of Vermont was owned by New York and New Hampshire.

Today in history ...

 (Cliccate qua per la versione italiana.)

250 years ago today marked the end of the Seven Years’ War. (Five days prior saw the end of the French-Indian War, which was the North American front of the Seven Years’ War.)
When Russia finally emerged from the conflict, Austria realized that, by itself, it could never win the war.  Both powers decided, therefore, to sit at the negotiating table and try to bring to an end a conflict that had gone on too long and was no longer sustainable by either side. The negotiations for reaching peace were led by Augustus III of Saxony, King of Poland, and took place at the his castle in Hubertusberg.

On 15 February 1763 the two powers signed the Treaty of Hubertusberg, which essentially brought the geo-political structure of Europe back to the status quo ante, i.e., to the structure as it was in 1756, prior to the conflict. Following the agreements, Prussia saw itself reconfirmed as a sovereign state in its territorial integrity and kept possession of Silesia. Austria had to abandon any ambitions of regaining Silesia, for which it had spent seven years of bitter war.

On 10 February 1763, a few days before the signing of the Treaty of Hubertusberg, France and Britain had signed a peace treaty in Paris that he had finally put an end to their long conflict. The Treaty of Paris of 1763 ended the French-Indian War, which involved most of the European countries and their colonies.

Hubertusburg Castle
(photo: imageshack.us)