A killing in Tripoli (1843): principle and contingency and personal diplomacy
Abstract This article examines the trial in 1843 and 1844 of Giovanni Battista Caruana, a Maltese, for the murder of a Jew in Tripoli. He was found guilty but was not executed because the victim's impoverished wife agreed to accept compensation. The case took place against the background of the British government's increasing impatience with what they saw as uncontrolled Maltese and Ionian communities, leading to the enactment of the Foreign Jurisdiction Act of 1844. It also demonstrated the importance of the individual authority of the Consul, Hanmer Warrington, and the extent to which consuls' personal objectives and opinions weighed on the development of British policy, and the extent to which Warrington's concern to uphold the law coincided with that of the Pasha of Tripoli, so that the case led to a close identification between the local government and the British consular representative.
Consul Warrington's English Garden
Abstract In 1820, when he had already been six years in Tripoli, the British Consul General, Colonel Hanmer Warrington, acquired a small country estate about a mile beyond the city walls. The move had political implications that he may not have considered or appreciated at the time. But the fact that for a quarter of a century (1820-46) Consul Warrington lived most of the year, and eventually all the year, in this so-called ‘English Garden’ in the oasis-suburb of the menscia brought this influential, larger-than-life figure into much closer, personal contact with local dissident and opposition figures than he would ever have done had he been always shut up in town. In the decade 1832-42 Consul Warrington's official diplomatic position in Tripoli, together with his informal role as doyen of the menscia residents, placed him in a unique position to meddle and mediate in the affairs of the Regency of Tripoli. Such was the case under the semi-independent Karamanli regime and, after 1835, under the Ottoman Turkish administration ruling direcdy from Constantinople. Although the rewards of this risky policy might have been spectacular for Warrington and for Great Britain (and they were nearly achieved in 1842), such success was elusive.
The Bastille: A History of a Symbol of Despotism and Freedom
This book is both an analysis of the Bastille as cultural paradigm and a case study on the history of French political culture. It examines in particular the storming and subsequent fall of the Bastille in Paris on July 14, 1789 and how it came to represent the cornerstone of the French Revolution, becoming a symbol of the repression of the Old Regime. Lusebrink and Reichardt use this semiotic reading of the Bastille to reveal how historical symbols are generated; what these symbols’ functions are in the collective memory of societies; and how they are used by social, political, and ideological groups.

To facilitate the symbolic nature of the investigation, this analysis of the evolving signification of the Bastille moves from the French Revolution to the nineteenth century to contemporary history. The narrative also shifts from France to other cultural arenas, like the modern European colonial sphere, where the overthrow of the Bastille acquired radical new signification in the decolonization period of the 1940s and 1950s. The Bastille demonstrates the potency of the interdisciplinary historical research that has characterized the end of this century, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches, and taking its methodological tools from history, sociology, linguistics, and cultural and literary studies.