ASSESSING THE DAMAGE

How great an impact did the international scene in general and the war with Naples in particular have on Sicilian developments? Is the decline so painfully evident in these years best explained as the result of Sicily's forced war with the Angevins; of her diplomatic and cultural isolation; or of the control of her international commerce by foreign monopolies? Certainly these explanations have found the greatest number of supporters, within Sicily and without; and the assumptions that lie behind this line of reasoning also have much to do with the current debate over the applicability of the “dualist” economic model. The most influential figure here is Benedetto Croce, whose classic History of the Kingdom of Naples argued that Sicily's radical separation from her traditional peninsular partner in 1282, and the acrimonious relations that followed, was nothing less than a catastrophe that spelled the ruin of both lands. This rupture, formalized at Caltabellotta in 1302, according to Croce “marked the beginning of much trouble and little greatness.” Commercial and cultural contacts vital to both lands were permanently severed, and a lasting enmity took their place. The subsequent military conflict – a “Ninety Years War,” as Santi Correnti called it – wasted precious energies and resources, and forced both the Sicilians and the Neapolitans, and their various allies and opponents, to abandon efforts to expand Latin influence into the Levant at a time when Acre was falling, or had fallen, and when the most promising opportunities existed for strengthening the western presence in Achaea, Constantinople, and parts of Asia Minor.