Talk:Joannes Lucius
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
[edit] Name of Trogir
Quote from [[1]] page; "Please, keep in mind that, per WP:NC, for the purposes of naming this article the names used for this artist by Latin, Italian, Croatian or Chinese-speaking individuals and authors (of the past, present and future) are irrelevant. Instead, we should consider only the names commonly used in English-language" Trogir is known in English language as Trogir, not Trau:) And that is also its historical name (on Croatian language). Also Marulić is an Croatian writer (father of croatian literature). |Ceha 18:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nationality
Lucio is Italian for culture, instruction, life, birth and ethnicity. I wrote his works in Italian. So that I have correct the article. The previous claim for a supposed 'Croatian' nationality was not based on accurate sources. He was not born in Croatia, and he did not even knew Croatian. --Giovanni Giove 08:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Your claims are unsourced. I provided three scientific sources that mention him as a Croatian. Please explain why my sources are not accurate. --Zmaj 08:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Your sources are totally based on Yugoslavian papers. It's well know that in Yugoslavia and Croatia Giovanni Lucio is claimed to be Croatian, and he is called Ivan Lucic. Try with logic arguments.--Giovanni Giove 09:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- That's simply not true. My first source is a Dutch scholar, my second an American one. Only the third reference is a Croatian book, and I'll remove it for the sake of objectivity. --Zmaj 09:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- All your sources are based on Croatian sources. I shall futhermore to point out something that is not reported in the Yugoslavian books you used at school: Lucio clearly denided to be Croat, in fact he pointed out the existence of a Roman Dalmatia, different from the Croatian Dalmatia, for habits, language and culture. That Lucio... not an evil 'irridentist'.--Giovanni Giove 09:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- All your sources are based on Croatian sources. - Are they? Could be, we'd have to check. But even if we checked and found out they really used Croatian sources, if contemporary Dutch and American historians consider them valid sources, where's the problem?
- Lucio clearly denied to be Croat - Did he? Somehow I doubt that. Please quote where he said that he was not a Croat. Then we'll see whether that should be taken at face value.
- not an evil "irridentist" - Who are you talking about?
- --Zmaj 09:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- The source you want is Johannis Lucii De regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae - Liber duos, (Amsterdam 1666). Read your sources, they are based on Yugoslavian sources. Depsite this, I wrote some more logic argumets, such as language, culture birth place, spoken languges, studies, political possession of the birth place, life... Similar argumets to enforce a possible Croatian nationaly: nothing at all. --Giovanni Giove 10:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- I provided non-Croatian sources that mention him as a Croatian. How about you provide some non-Italian sources that mention him as an Italian? Then we can continue the discussion. Until then, you're in the wrong. "Logic arguments"? It's your own private logic. Read WP:REF. --Zmaj 10:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- All your sources are based on Croatian sources. - Are they? Could be, we'd have to check. But even if we checked and found out they really used Croatian sources, if contemporary Dutch and American historians consider them valid sources, where's the problem?
- All your sources are based on Croatian sources. I shall futhermore to point out something that is not reported in the Yugoslavian books you used at school: Lucio clearly denided to be Croat, in fact he pointed out the existence of a Roman Dalmatia, different from the Croatian Dalmatia, for habits, language and culture. That Lucio... not an evil 'irridentist'.--Giovanni Giove 09:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- That's simply not true. My first source is a Dutch scholar, my second an American one. Only the third reference is a Croatian book, and I'll remove it for the sake of objectivity. --Zmaj 09:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Manual of style states that: Nationality (In the normal case this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable. Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.) The word citizen has emphasis. Is Giovanni Lucio, a citizen of Croatia or Italy? That's the question, and please don't edit war, until a reasonable conclusion is made. Thank you.--Dark Falls talk 11:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- He was a citizen of Venice (there was no Italy back then). He definitely wasn't a citizen of Croatia. On the other hand, his ethnicity is relevant for his notability - he means much more to Croatians (who call him "the father of Croatian historiography") than to Italians. So my proposal is to write that he was a Venetian historiographer, but to include his importance for Croatian historiography in the opening chapter, since it's crucial. Is that OK? --Zmaj 11:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- We agree that he is Venetian, but put a link to show his relation to Croatia? We cannot put him as Italian, because of its non-existence. For an example, see other articles such as the Roman emperor Julius Caesar. Is Caesar considered Italian or Roman? The solution seems acceptable to me, but I am not sure about Giovanni... --Dark Falls talk 11:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, we can say he was an Italian in the sense that Giovanni Lucio lived in the realm of medieval Italy - which is well-established and widely used historical notion. The same way are Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci Italians.--Giorgio Orsini 13:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci lived on Apenine peninsula in ancient roman province of Italia. Dalmatia is not and can not be Italy in any sense. We can only talk about parts of Dalmatia being part of Italy in political sense from 1920 to 1944-45. --No.13 21:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, we can say he was an Italian in the sense that Giovanni Lucio lived in the realm of medieval Italy - which is well-established and widely used historical notion. The same way are Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci Italians.--Giorgio Orsini 13:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Your sources are totally based on Yugoslavian papers. It's well know that in Yugoslavia and Croatia Giovanni Lucio is claimed to be Croatian, and he is called Ivan Lucic. Try with logic arguments.--Giovanni Giove 09:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Not nationality - something else
Yes, we can say he was an Italian in the sense that Giovanni Lucio lived in the realm of medieval Italy - which is well-established and widely used historical notion. The same way are Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci Italians.
Proof:
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9108470/Leonardo-da-Vinci
Leonardo da Vinci born April 15, 1452, Anchiano, near Vinci, Republic of Florence [now in Italy] died May 2, 1519, Cloux [now Clos-Lucé], France
Italian painter, draftsman, sculptor, architect, and engineer whose genius, perhaps more than that of any other figure, epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. --Giorgio Orsini 13:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
May I point out that Lucius was memeber of St.Jerome church in Rome where for someone to join that person should have ethnic Slavic/Croatian origin and should be able to speak "Illyric" (Croatian) language. He is equally part of Croatian heritage as he is of Italian. Please respect that. --No.13 21:33, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- This beloved Croatian never wrote a line in Croatian, he pointed out the difference between the 'Roman Dalmatia' and the 'Slavic Dalmatia'....--Giovanni Giove 21:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes and? There are other facts which point to his Croatian origins such as memembership in St.Jerome church/fraternity, his close friendship and cooperation with various memers of Croatian nobility. And in the end Leibnitz for example wrote in French and Latin and he was no doubtably German. While you mention his work "De Regno Croatiae and Dalmatiae" is one of the most important for Croatian historiography because it speaks about Croatian kingdom from it's begining's to his time. --No.13 21:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- ...pointing out it was quite different and separatd from Dalmatia:-)... and basically enemy of the Dalmatian cities :-))))
- He presented the core facts buddy, that is what historians do. --No.13 21:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- ...pointing out it was quite different and separatd from Dalmatia:-)... and basically enemy of the Dalmatian cities :-))))
- Yes and? There are other facts which point to his Croatian origins such as memembership in St.Jerome church/fraternity, his close friendship and cooperation with various memers of Croatian nobility. And in the end Leibnitz for example wrote in French and Latin and he was no doubtably German. While you mention his work "De Regno Croatiae and Dalmatiae" is one of the most important for Croatian historiography because it speaks about Croatian kingdom from it's begining's to his time. --No.13 21:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
