What a silly argument Joseph Muscat (The Sunday Times of Malta, July 7, ‘Grudge against the British’) brought up, criticising this paper for publishing ‘Anglophobia’ articles. His letter almost appears to take the role of a veiled appeal to the editors to censor contributions of this type.

I admire the Times of Malta institution. In spite of its ‘Britishness’, it still strives to uphold its dedicated media mission in guarding such a forum. It is not easy to establish a nation’s identification traits after a long period of colonial rule – hence the profusion of persistent mnemonic colonial products, including mediated mentalities – but selecting which historical facts to publish of one’s past is tantamount to collective memorial suicide.

Documented history, even when it serves to whet our appetites with curiosity and trivia, contributes handsomely to replenish our knowledge of past periods, events or personages.

That poverty and despotic administrative attitudes by foreigners reached an all-time low in the first decades of British rule in Malta is evidenced by many including Maltese politician George Mitrovich’s published communications to the British Parliament and to the Maltese nation.

Mitrovich considered even the French period as being better (in the appointment of local administrators and judges) than the 1830s.

This unfortunate period compelled the destitute Maltese to migrate to North Africa. In a century no less than 17,000 are estimated to have sought a better future in Tunisia alone.