Talk:Condottieri
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rev. James Triggs 20:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
The French sentence under Hawkswood - something about a funeral? - doesn't seem to fit. --Quadalpha 23:24, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- These cities, such as Venice, Florence, and Genoa had woefully small armies and were increasingly becoming targets of attack by foreign powers as well as envious neighbors.
I don't think that's really true, especially of Venice. In times of emergency, all males between 17 and 60 years were registered and their weapons were surveyed. The register of 1338 estimated that 30,000 Venetian men were capable of bearing arms; many of them were skilled crossbowmen. In their 1426 alliance with Florence, Venice agreed to supply 8,000 cavalry and 3,000 infantry -- very few of whom were mercenaries. I think later events and trends are being pushed to a too-early period. ---Michael K. Smith 21:21, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Singular form
I don't know in English language, but the original Italian word is condottiero.
- Our confident but anonymous contributor is in error, as the briefest glance into OED would have established. In OED under condottiere, "erron." stands for "erroneously." See De Mauro dizionario della lingua italiana. It is not an alternative spelling; it is a gaffe akin to calling a waiter camariero. I have corrected this twice now and shall again, if necessary. --Wetman 02:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- Wetman, for Italian I think you are wrong. The De Mauro is referring to condottiere as "someone who drives a vehicle", whereas condottiero as a military or political leader. Also, you should note that Michael Mallet, probably the most important historian for the period and condottieri in paritcular, uses the word condottiero. Paolo
-
-
- "Camariero, un piatto di spaghetto!" Wouldn't that be odd! The ending -iere means "the one who". The modern condottiere of the motor vehicle is simply a modern extension of "the one who leads or conducts"; a member of the elite corps of bersaglieri is not a "bersagliero" but a "bersagliere", after all. --Wetman 23:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- ...just as a carabiniere is a member of the carabinieri, and a portiere is an essential member of a calcio team. --Wetman 08:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Wetman, I will repeat again. The standard italian use is condottiero, not condottiere. It is the term used (for example) by professor Eugenio Garin, which is a major authority for the italian history of the 400. And it is the term used by professor Michael Mallet, which is the standard reference for military history of the period. For both of them, see for example "L'Uomo del Rinascimento" (The Man of Renaissance), edited by Eugenio Garin; it include an essay by Michael Mallet, titled "Il Condottiero". pibizza 08:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Can I assume there is a consensus to use condottiero as a singular form, and not condottiere ? If there is consensus, I will make the change. pibizza 11:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Assume consensus? My Cassell's Italian-English and English-Italian Dictionary does list both forms. I shall add "or condottiero". --Wetman 23:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry to interupt here but as Wetman asked my opinion here it is, I have always said condottiero, but I would not correct anyone who said condottiere, allthough for some inexplicable reason it does not sound right - I follow Wetman's logic but we are a very odd lot! Giano | talk 18:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- From a little bit of research of mine, the current most used form is condottiero. Condottiere was more used in the past. As for the ending of the word, my understanding is that both are used (for example, you have nocchiero and scudiero). I do not know which are the rules, but my understanding is that is more a matter of use than a matter of rule. pibizza 15:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry to interupt here but as Wetman asked my opinion here it is, I have always said condottiero, but I would not correct anyone who said condottiere, allthough for some inexplicable reason it does not sound right - I follow Wetman's logic but we are a very odd lot! Giano | talk 18:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think you are right, I can immagine my American grandmother (who learnt very correct Italian in the 1920s) sayng condottiere, with a heavy stress on the final syllable, but today it is most definitly condottiero - it's almost as though the "O" is for swashbucklers, soldiers and the risque and the like and "iere" has become for public servants and the dull etc - just my own theory you understand. Giano | talk 21:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Assume consensus? My Cassell's Italian-English and English-Italian Dictionary does list both forms. I shall add "or condottiero". --Wetman 23:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'd always trust Giano's ear. The next time I'm overcharged in the market, I shall be sure to shout masdaniero! --Wetman 21:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)--Wetman 21:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
The word "condottiere" exists, as already documented, I could only add Petrocchi's 1891 dictionary, which reports together both condottiere and condottiero without distinction between the principal meanings of "driver" and (social, political, etc) "leader". Among the many references, in Alessandro Manzoni's "I promessi sposi", "Don Abbondio pagò in fretta, e licenziò il condottiere" (cap. XXX). In modern Italian, "condottiere" in the sense of "driver" has been replaced by "conducente", nevertheless it still is a correct form for both meanings. All forms in "-ere" always are slightly more correct than those in "-ero", which are their popular corruptions. But sometimes the popular form becomes prevalent and this is one of those cases. I personally wouldn't delete the redirect from "condottiere", it still is the original form and it simply is little used (and little known in Italy :-) --g 11:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Condottieri, Machiavelli, and comments.
Machiavelli wrote a lot of nonsense about the "Condottieri". For example he wrote that the battles of the "Condottieri" were rather "frivolous". This is not true. The modern historiography has demonstrated how bloody were the battles of the 15th Century in Italy. Gian Giacomo Trivulzio was considered a traitor by the Milanese who contempted him. Andrea Doria fought alongside "everybody" but his goal was a strong Republic of Genoa. A comparison between Trivulzio and Doria is misleading. The last famous battle of the "Condottieri" was Governolo (1526) when Giovanni delle Bande Nere fought against the Germans to shield Rome.
- Mm... if I thought I was better informed and smarter than Machiavelli, I'd stay anonymous too! --Wetman 09:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I knew that the article about the Condottieri had to cointain the tall story about the "bloodless" battles. It is always the same. Read in internet "Perdite segnalate dalle fonti coeve relative ad alcune battaglie e scontri" and you will see how bloody the battles were. Machiavelli`s books are full of wrong statements. The Condottiere Carmagnola was beheaded by Venice when the Venetians started to believe he didn`t fight enough.
[edit] Spelling Errors
Why is it the condotta means contract here, when all my sources tell me condotta means 'conduct' and contract means 'contratto'? Furthermore, barbuta and barbute are names of an early Italian helmet, also known as a Italian Sallet in Germany and a French sallet in France. Rev. James Triggs 20:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Huh?
Now as many the condottieri comprised as many Italian companies as foreign, creating soon a host of national companies
I can't make heads or tails of that. I'd fix it, but I don't even know what it's supposed to mean. Kafziel Talk 15:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Werner von Urslingen died when?
The article says that Werner was executed by Rienzo in 1347, but Oscar Browning's 19th century book Guelphs and Ghibellines says that Urslingen fought for Johanna, Queen of Naples form 1348 to 1350 and went back to Germany with his plunder,[1] which would be difficult for a man three years dead to do. Any source for Urslingen dying in 1347? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piratedan (talk • contribs) 02:24, August 26, 2007 (UTC)