7 June remains a date of relevance in Maltese history - even now, 106 years after the event that made this date famous took place.
On 7 June 1919, riots broke out across colonial Malta, centred especially in the capital of Valletta. These events left four Maltese dead, with another two succumbing to their injuries weeks later at the hands of British colonial forces.
The riots are heralded today by many as being Malta's first step towards attaining independence - kick starting a process which ultimately would take until 1964 to conclude.
But how grounded in fact is that assertion? Were the Sette Giugno riots motivated by a desire for independence? Was self-government a consequence of the riots? Did Malta's first steps towards independence actually come later?
The Malta Independent on Sunday looks at this important historical event, in an attempt to answer some of those questions.
Malta, World War One, and the aftermath
The turn of the 20th century was, to say the least, eventful for Malta.
On a political level, the island started the century by going through the pains of a people experiencing representative democracy for the first time ever.
It was the Knutsford Constitution granted to Malta in 1887 had provided this: a Council of Government made up of the governor and 20 members, 14 of which were to be elected by a limited Maltese electorate (you had to be male, over 21 years of age, and exceed a particular income threshold in order to be eligible to vote).
Disagreements and bickering was the order of the day: no fewer than seven elections took place in the 15 years between 1888 and 1903 - even though a council lifespan was meant to be three years.
Notable among those disagreements was what is today known as the Language Question: the British wanted the English language brought into Malta, but the elite - represented in the Council of Government by Fortunato Mizzi and his Partito Anti-Reformista (a pre-cursor to today's Nationalist Party) - wanted Italian to remain the prevailing language.
The disagreements ultimately led to the 1887 constitution being revoked in 1903, after the Council of Government refused to vote through the Education budget, and replaced by one which was made up of 20 members, only 8 of which elected.
But beyond the politics, there was also the not-so small matter of the economy.
Malta had what today is referred to as a 'fortress economy' - meaning that the fate of the island's economic wellbeing hinged almost exclusively on the British use of Malta as a military base.
As the political classes bickered, the 1890s and early 1900s brought an economic boom for the people: the British carried out an immense number of infrastructural projects such as new drainage systems, new water distribution systems, the train service between Valletta and Rabat, and a new breakwater commissioned in 1901 and starting work in 1903.
The Second Boer War in South Africa, which happened between 1899 and 1902, had also resulted in an increase in military presence in Malta - which always brought with it more spending, and better economic times.
Government income reached record levels, as did the surpluses. The boom was huge: but that meant that the bust which came in 1906 was all the more severe.
Between 1906 and 1910 the local government reported a cumulative deficit of £83,010 - a huge amount for the time, equivalent to around £12.5 million in today's money, and enough to render the government essentially unable to function.
The only solution to make up the deficit was to increase taxes: a prospect which fomented severe discontent among the masses.
Malta was not directly involved in the First World War which started in 1914: but being a British colony and a key naval base, there was still a significant impact.
Like every war before it, the First World War provided more opportunity for work: British military presence on the island was at an all-time high, and a significant number of Maltese also signed up to join the British Army and the Royal Navy - no doubt enticed by the better wages that could be had.
But it also brought severe inflation prompted by food scarcity. The price of bread - the staple food of the masses - tripled, meat prices tripled, and sugar prices quadrupled. Fixed salaries suddenly were not enough to get by, leading to disgruntlement among the work force.
The situation brought the earliest example of trade unionism in Malta, as dockyard workers came together in 1917 and took industrial action which eventually resulted in a pay rise of 50%. In May 1918, government clerical staff unsuccessfully tried to follow suit, and that October it was then the police who staged their own industrial action.
The end of the First World War in 1918 only made the situation worse: military activity dipped, and there were mass lay-off at the dockyard as a result. Many of those who served with the British forces in the trenches and on the high seas returned to Malta, now unemployed.
Food prices were still on the rise, and the people were now in search of answers.
A politically-charged riot or a riot prompted by economic desperation?
Within this context, the riots came as no surprise to the British colonial government. One official at Whitehall wrote: "We knew what might happen in Malta when the war came to an end" - and in June 1918 Government Walter Methuen wrote to his superior that "there is a huge sense of discontent and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues to get worse."
Lieutenant Governor William Robertson in April 1919 warned his superiors: "The general public does not and cannot have any good will towards the government, and in my opinion there is a big lack of sympathy towards England which can lead to ugly consequences."
Those ugly consequences manifested themselves on 7 and 8 June 1919 - the Sette Giugno riots. Three men - Manwel Attard, Ġużè Bajada and Wenzu Dyer - were killed on the spot on the first day of unrest. All three of them were shot by British soldiers. Carmelo Abela was bayoneted on the second day, and he succumbed to his injuries on 16 June.
There were two others who could be considered victims of the riots: Antonio Cassano was wounded and eventually passed away in November 1919 from his injuries, while Francesco Darmanin died on 3 July 1919, with his cause of death listed as acute mania which came about as a result of a strong heartache during the uprisings of 7 June.
Were the events that transpired motivated by a political cause - ergo, a desire for more representation - or by economic desperation?
During the early months of 1919, a National Assembly - which was a group of people representing various parts of Maltese society - had met with the aim of insisting with the British government for self-government.
It was in the process of meeting on 7 June itself, precisely to discuss a message from the Secretary of State for the Colonies that the British were inclined to giving Malta a new constitution - although the details on what it would be were, at the time, still scant.
There was a crowd in support of the Assembly - but such was the nature of the riot, that the Assembly members actually had no idea what was happening in Valletta's streets while they were meeting. The realisation only came at some point during the meeting: first with a quiet whisper in Augustus Bartolo's ear to tell him that the printing press of his newspaper the Daily Malta Chronicle had been set on fire, and then - in an altogether more dramatic turn of events - when people burst through the hall doors with an injured and bloodied young man on their shoulders.
It's difficult to understand the intentions of a crowd. But perhaps one can go some way in doing so from taking note of its targets.
If this were a politically-motivated uprising by people wanting independence from British rule, then one would expect that it would be British offices and buildings that would be targeted. Yet, while British flags were torn up, and some buildings such as the Union Club suffered some minor damage - the ransacking, with the exception of the Meteorological Office, was reserved for elsewhere.
The Daily Malta Chronicle, for instance, was a target because, as an inquiry into the events that unfolded later revealed, it had slammed dockyard workers for their industrial action in 1917. The house of Anthony Cassar Torreggiani, a leading grain importer and also the man leading the Flour Control Office - the body which controlled the distribution of flour to bakeries and which many felt was the cause of the high bread prices, was also targeted.
The three fatalities of the first day of rioting were, in fact, related to these two targets: Wenzu Dyer was shot while escaping the Chronicle's printing press, while Manwel Attard and Ġużè Bajada were killed as they were ransacking the Cassar Torregiani house.
The second day of rioting followed the same pattern. The house of Colonel John Francia, another grain importer, and the mills of Farrugia & Sons in Santa Venera were the targets of the protestors.
The Lieutenant Governor's house, a few steps away from the Farrugia & Sons mills, was left untouched - as were other buildings related to the British, even after it was British soldiers who had shot dead three Maltese protestors the day before.
The fact that both Francia and Bartolo were actually a part of the National Assembly which was working for Malta to gain self-government did not dissuade the protesters one bit.
The British reaction
In some ways the British were in actual fact quite surprised that they were not the predominant targets of the unrest.
The British had already promised a new constitution to the Maltese before the unrest: in fact there was some consternation on their end, as one official noted plainly: "the Maltese will now think that we have granted a constitution because of the riots" when in actual fact it had already been in the works.
Perhaps that explains why the British really were in no particular hurry to actually grant the Maltese self-government. Had the British felt that the riots were politically motivated and they could only hold their position on the island by placating the masses with a new constitution, then it's likely that they'd have done that with haste.
Yet, the new constitution came on 14 April 1921 - almost two years after the events of Sette Giugno.
The 1921 Constitution: A step towards independence?
The Amery-Milner Constitution, as it is known, was without a doubt a step forward for Malta on a political level.
This gave Malta a government for local affairs by diarchy - with the creation of a Senate and a 32-man Legislative Assembly.
It is seen by some as the first ginger steps in Malta's path towards independence: a stepping stone, if you like, for what eventually came to pass in 1964.
But the reality was that it was never intended as such. The Prince of Wales himself told the Legislative Assembly in its inaugural session in November 1921: "King George V is confident that the old loyal spirit still prevails, and that (Malta's) people will so administer their affairs as not only to advance the welfare of their own community but to further the interests of the British Empire."
The ever harsher reality is that in many ways, the Amery-Milner Constitution was merely an extension of the past British policies when it came to Malta's constitution development.
Walter Ellis, an official at the Colonial Office, explained it succinctly, saying that in the face of political agitation the best course of action was "granting Malta from time to time more or less illusory constitutions and then withdrawing them as soon as the Maltese attempted to use their power in any way which does not approve itself to us."
That's exactly what happened with the 1835 constitution - which lasted only 14 years, the 1887 Knutsford Constitution - which lasted only 16 years, and indeed, the 1921 Amery-Milner Constitution - which lasted just 12 years, as it was suspended in 1933.
It wasn't until 1947 that Malta re-obtained self-governance, and even that only lasted 11 years until 1958.
What the Amery-Milner Constitution did establish for the first time in Malta's political system as a proper Parliament.
Malta had never had something like the Legislative Assembly before, and the formation of such a system also heralded the formal creation of political parties - some of which are still the main political powerhouses today.
It was the first time that the Maltese electorate (then still limited by gender and income) could be properly politically delineated - in fact, none of the four parties which contested the first elections in 1921 achieved a majority.
It was also the first time that political parties could be held accountable for decisions in the local sphere, and, from an electoral perspective, the first time that the single transferable vote system - which is now such an important part of Malta's electoral system - was used here.
What of Malta's actual desire to be independent, though? The reality is that up until that point the desire for independence was quite minimal. There seemed to be an understanding - even in political spheres - that the Malta needed the British just as much as the British needed the Malta.
Indeed, the National Assembly in 1919 did not make demands for independence, but rather for autonomy to govern local affairs.
Even after self-government was granted, the Nationalist Party, for instance, made a request for Malta to have Dominion Status in 1932 - a request which the British refused. The party would continue to hold the belief right through to the late 1950s.
The Labour Party meanwhile under the leadership of Dom Mintoff came to advocate for Malta's integration with Great Britain - which was the total opposite of independence - to the point that he pushed the matter to a referendum in 1956; a referendum which was approved, although it was boycotted by the Nationalist Party.
Integration never came to pass as negotiations between Mintoff and the British government broke down.
Only then did both the PL and the PN agree that the course of action was independence: they jointly signed the Break with Britain resolution after it was unanimously approved in Parliament on 30 December 1957.
Within seven years, Malta would have its independence.
Where does Sette Giugno fit in to Maltese history?
The Sette Giugno riots remain important within the Maltese context.
It's the only time in the modern age of history that a riot or revolt turned fatal in the country, and the day still carries heavy symbolism when it comes, particularly, to patriotism and national identity.
Malta's first flavour of parliamentary democracy came soon after the riots - even if they were already in the works - and certain elements of back then, such as the political parties and the core of the electoral system, remain present in Malta's political landscape today.
The day is still commemorated each year with a ceremony and speech by Parliament's Speaker.
Irrespective of whether it was the first step towards independence or not, its place as an important part of Malta's colonial history can never be denied.