Choosing Italy's Citizens in the Eastern Borderlands

Saturday, January 9, 2010: 12:10 PM
Molly B (Hyatt)
Maura E. Hametz , Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA
The Paris Peace agreements concluded after World War I provided former subjects of the Austro-Hungarian empire automatic citizenship in the successor state in whose territory they resided.  However, the 1919 Treaty of St. Germain excepted those in provinces assigned to Italy.  Peacemakers’ recognition of Italy’s dual status as “victor” and “successor” state allowed Italian officials to exercise a strong hand in shaping requirements for Italian citizenship.  Under the November 1920 Rapallo Treaty, Trieste and surrounding areas of the former Habsburg Adriatic Littoral (dubbed Venezia Giulia by the Italians) were officially assigned to Italy, and Italian citizenship was conferred on “native born” in the new territory.  However, many living in the “new provinces” were foreign born or did not fulfill requirements for “automatic” citizenship.  Directives of December 1920 outlined linguistic, residency, and property requirements to opt for Italian citizenship; “option” cases were decided on an individual basis.             This paper focuses on the Citizenship Commission of the Prefecture of Trieste set up in 1920 to adjudicate these cases and its decisions until disbandment in 1936.  It demonstrates how the Italian government (liberal, then fascist) enforced “national standards” and disseminated ideas of “proper” Italianness in citizenship decisions affected by three primary factors --- gender, prior political affiliation, and ethnic association.  The paper speaks to the construction of “official” state identities and the impact of cultural, social, and gender factors on political identities in the climate of nationalist politics after World War I that have been at the center of Alexander De Grand’s work for more than four decades, from his dissertation on the Nationalist Association (1968) to his examinations of fascism and race (2005).  It points to the international implications of borderland politics that form an important aspect of his comparative analysis of the fascist “style” of rule (2007).