Constructing Ionian identities: the Ionian Islands in British official ...

wants a place and everybody can not get a place, therefore there was a constant
discontent which we were unable to satisfy”. 127 For Storks it was a familiar
complaint. His secretary, Wolff, wrote Fortescue noted: “there are 1600 places
[public offices] in the Islands. So long as you cannot give a place to every adult
male, you will have an opposition working up this cause if not for office, at any rate
for re-election. Even amongst the employees there are several intriguing with the
Risospasti”. 128 Storks believed Greek and Ionian political behaviour was the same.
Holland and Markides thoroughly analysed the diplomacy regarding the
cession. They argue it was a natural progression and influenced by the Risospasti
movement in the Septinsula without considering the cession as a complex and
divisive issue amongst the Ionians. 129 Hionidis, using Knox's article and various
newspapers as his sources, argues the cession of the Islands was “in the context of
British sympathy for national movements” in Europe, such as Italy and Hungary, and
the colonial administration was “unequal to the effects of implacable nationalism” in
the Islands. 130 However, these views conflict with the material in the Russell and
Colonial Office Papers, where cession was viewed as a European issue, introduced,
debated and finalised amongst the major European Powers and excluded any
involvement or debate from the Ionian people through the prorogation of the
Assembly by Storks in 1863. 131
127 Ibid., pp. 374-378.
128 Ibid., p. 374.
129 Holland R., and Markides D., The British and the Hellenes, pp. 46-80.
130 Hionidis P. L., “The Greek Kingdom in British Public Debate”, pp. 81-91.
346