To the Editors of La Voce di New York:
Professor Anthony Tamburri, an esteemed and illuminating writer on Italian American literature and culture, is correct only in a small way when in an interview [VDNY, 14 April 2022] that highlights his extraordinary work at the Calandra Italian American Institute, he comments as follows:
«Too many times we see in the community the creation of narratives that have no foundation in history. An example of this is the statue of Christopher Columbus in Columbus Circle. That is undoubtedly an Italian-American symbol, but it isn’t the result of the 1891 lynching (when in New Orleans an enraged crowd lynched 11 Italian immigrants), which is what many people say. Why is it important to correct them? It’s crucial, because you need to learn accurate historical facts.”
It is quite true that the Columbus initiative began before the New Orleans lynching–in 1889 according to one of its organizers. But the surrounding atmosphere was such that it was inevitable that the lynching and the monument would be interpreted as reflecting on one another.
News of the tragic episode in New Orleans, which took place on 14 March 1891, arrived while in New York, in the Italian American community, the campaign for funding the monument was in full swing, and while the sculptor in Italy was in the first phases of the project. The lynching of the immigrants in New Orleans meanwhile created a stressful international situation between Italy and the United States—a situation whose details were followed attentively in Little Italy. In Rome there were members of Parliament who requested that the Kingdom of Italy declare war on the United States. In Washington, when it became known that President Harrison had made a payment to Italy in compensation for the deaths of its citizens, there were Senators who called for Harrison’s impeachment. These developments highlighted the situation of Italian immigrants in the United States, and it was natural that there should have been consequences, whether potential or real, political and/or financial, for a project that was still being put together. In the end the consequences were advantageous, since the monument could be presented as a symbol of reconciliation, and it even elicited a certain feeling of guilt on the part of the American establishment. When the New York Parks Commission attempted to place the monument near Italian Harlem, the organizers proved able to win instead the central location in what would become Columbus Circle.
When the Columbus monument’s cornerstone was dedicated in September 1892 (before the arrival of the statue), the New York Times ran an editorial [15 September 1892] that specifically mentioned the crisis created by the New Orleans lynching:
«There is a special reason, in the recent straining of relations between Italy and the United States, why we should take pains to recognize every compliment that is paid to us by our Italian residents; and it may be expected that the gift of the monument to COLUMBUS, when it occurs, will furnish us matter for reproof and edification, as well as for a recognition of the friendliness of the Italian residents in New-York».
It is worth underlining the phrase «it … will furnish us matter for reproof» that appears in the editorial, since the Times itself had contributed to the unhappy wave of anti-Italian sentiment expressed by much of the American press in the wake of the New Orleans lynching.
Please excuse this small history lesson, which will perhaps be useful to many people. I have been a friend of Tamburri’s for 20 years now– I appear at his side in one of the photos accompanying the interview. And I agree wholeheartedly with him on the value of history and the need for rigorous discussion to replace the retelling of old fables.
William J. Connell
Professor of History and La Motta Chair in Italian Studies
Seton Hall University
Co-Editor, Routledge History of Italian Americans
Caro Direttore,
Il professore Anthony Tamburri, stimato e grande esperto di letteratura italoamericana, ha ragione solo in parte quando dice nella sua intervista [VDNY, 14 aprile 2022]:
«la statua di New York di Cristoforo Colombo a Columbus Circle … non è un risultato del linciaggio del 1891 (quello di New Orleans, quando una folla inferocita linciò 11 immigrati italiani), cosa che molti dicono. Che importanza ha correggerli? Molta, perché è fondamentale conoscere la storia esatta. Partendo da un antefatto sbagliato non si arriva mai a raccontare i fatti corretti».
È senz’altro vero che l’iniziativa ebbe origine nel 1889, cioè un po’ prima del linciaggio di New Orleans come dice Tamburri, ma il contesto fu tale che le due cose necessariamente s’incrociavano.
Notizie del tragico episodio di New Orleans, successo il 14 marzo 1891, avvengono con la campagna in New York per il finanziamento del monumento a Colombo in corso, e con lo scultore in Italia solo nelle prime fasi del lavoro, mentre il linciaggio degli immigrati a New Orleans creò una situazione internazionale molto difficile tra l’Italia e gli Stati Uniti i cui dettagli erano seguiti e ben conosciuti nella comunità italoamericana di New York. A Roma, alcuni parlamentari italiani avevano chiesto al Regno d’Italia una dichiarazione di guerra contro gli USA. A Washington, dopo il pagamento da parte del President Harrison all’Italia di un risarcimento per la perdita dei suoi cittadini, alcuni Senatori chiesero l’impeachment di Harrison. Questi sviluppi mettevano in risalto la situazione degli immigrati italiani qui, e che ci fossero conseguenze, sia potenziali che reali, sia politiche che finanziarie, per il progetto di New York ancora in gestazione era inevitabile: conseguenze piuttosto vantaggiose, in effetti, perché il monumento a Colombo si poteva presentare come simbolo di pace. Basta segnalare il successo registrato dagli organizzatori quando, nel marzo del 1892, la Parks Commission voleva localizzare il monumento vicino alla Harlem italiana, ma gli italiani ottennero invece il posto centrale e attuale, che divenne Columbus Circle.
Con l’inaugurazione della base del monumento nel settembre del 1892 (prima dell’arrivo della statua), gli editor del New York Times (15 settembre 1892) accennavano specificamente alla crisi creata dal linciaggio di New Orleans, scrivendo:
«There is a special reason, in the recent straining of relations between Italy and the United States, why we should take pains to recognize every compliment that is paid to us by our Italian residents; and it may be expected that the gift of the monument to COLUMBUS, when it occurs, will furnish us matter for reproof and edification, as well as for a recognition of the friendliness of the Italian residents in New-York».
Va sottolineato l’elemento autocritico nella parola «reproof» che si trova in questa rubrica. È significativo perché lo stesso Times aveva partecipato nell’anti-italianismo evidente in gran parte della stampa americana nel corso di queste vicende.
Scusatemi questa piccola lezione storica. Sono amico di Tamburri ormai da 20 anni. Appaio al suo fianco in una delle foto che accompagnava l’intervista. E non posso che concordare sul valore della storia e sulla necessità di discutere anziché ripetere le vecchie favole.
William J. Connell
Professor of History and La Motta Chair in Italian Studies
Seton Hall University
Co-Editor, Routledge History of Italian Americans
