Talk:Giovanni da Verrazzano

Corrections

The date for his first voyage is 1524, according to two other sources. Should this be changed? Amarite1 (talk) 20:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

New Dalmatia

The New England Coast was first called New Dalmatia by Verrazano in 1524. This is well documented on maps by other explorers. The fact that he called the land New Dalmatia could well mean that he has some link to Dalmatia in Croatia. He could be of Croatian Dalmatian origin or just simply spend some time there. Dalmatia Croatia was under Venice rule and the Croat citizens were called Venetian. It was common for all Croatians living under Venice (including Marco Polo) to translate the Slav last name into Italian. {unsigned}

The story of Giovanni Da Verrazano

He was born in Florence,Italy in the year 1480. He went to France many times in the age 15-20 and so on. He was ordered by the king of France Francis 1. {unsigned}

Giovanni da VerrazZano

It seems that Encyclopedia Britannica (ed. 1993) gives the spelling Giovanni da Verrazzano (which, by the way, is also the CORRECT Italian form). I was thinking to move this page to the correct spelling one. Let me know opinions at my talk. --Attilios 09:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

As I pointed out, people on Staten Island, where there is a ferry, a bridge, a Little League, and numerous businesses, etc. named for him spell it both ways, confusingly. If you pick one, you really need to have a link to it from the other.HarvardOxon 22:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC) you stupid

Some PC changes

This is not my area of expertise so I dont want to change any of the factual content. But May I submit that unless the naming ceremony is conducted in Christian ceremony it is not 'Christened'. While most of us knows what that means it is not correct and can incorrectly indicate a bias towards a Christian interpretation of history. I made the change already and I hope you agree. --Robotics1 17:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

On planet earth, the ceremony whereby a ship is named is called "christening," as was used in the article -- with ancient analogy to Christian Baptism but having lost absolutely all religious connotation. Here, we don't baptize bridges, but we do have an colloquialism that uses "christening" as "naming" -- it occurs in a variety of contexts and in secular newspapers and television broadcasts about inanimate objhects and ideas every day. How do they do things on your planet?HarvardOxon 18:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so. It might be true for ships in Christian nations on planet Earth. Not a ship lauched in Japan or Israel or Soudi Arabia and so on. Therefore the term is a Christian one whereas I feel Wikipedia should be worldwide - international and non religeous. --Robotics1 22:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The word 'christen' has very little to do with actual Christian ceremonies, and comes from the Old English word meaning to make Christian. Since about 1450 it has meaned 'to name' and brings no religious connotation with it. Besides this is the English Wikipedia and this term is often used in English. T REX_speak 19:46, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Name?

I know the article states that Verrazano can be wrote several differant ways, but the title and the article are not consistant? Could someone correct this?

I added the Globalize/USA markup because the Verrazano spelling is clearly a bias from US users, which are used to it. However, the correct spelling is Verrazzano. Check, for example, Encyclopedia Britannica entry... and I seem that this is still the most respectble source in US, I hope you agree. --Attilios 23:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

It's normal for there to be multiple spelling variations, in particular for Spanish people for some reason. It's discussed in a footnote. The name of the article is the most commonly used/known in English. Article titles are placeholders, symbolisms that represent whats in an article, they are not statements of fact. If you want to rename the article follow the renaming procedures (it's controversial so you'll need to get consensus first). Or, use the footnote to explain the spelling variations. --- Stbalbach 04:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Please, Verrazzano was Italian, not Spanish. I can't explain how easily American people confound Italians with Spanish, especially with language (would you be pleased if I'd confound you with a Norwegian only 'cause your language are somewhat similar?). Moreover, the note was clearly misleading: as the spelling confirmed by ALL serious sources (even English ones) is Verrazzano, to write "sometimes" is rather reductive, isn't it? Anyway, this encyclopedia is written in English, and that's true. However, it is not the Encyclopedia of the English motherlanguage people. And I seem that Verrazano is the spelling of US people mainly, so you should try to put here the most internationally recognized form of the name, even though the article is written in English. A question: what if I started a poll to redime the matter? Bye and good work. --Attilios 12:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry your right he's Italian, I've been dealing with a lot of 15-16th C exploration stuff lately, and have not studied Giovanni closely yet, so made a thoughtless assumption (at this point, if someone mistook me as Canadian, I would be happy). Well, whatever the correct spelling, there is no doubt that many published sources use a single z. As for the "sometimes", that was not my wording, and it's good to have more clarity on the "correct" spelling, but it would be even better if we had a source to back it up, because what if someone disagreed in the future. I'm really not sure how widespread it is in the USA, or what the nature of the spelling variation is, perhaps bringing in other people to comment would help. -- Stbalbach 15:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd also like to be a Spanish... now, seen the quality of life and teh corruption in Italy today. --Attilios 16:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

(laugh) well problems all around. --Stbalbach 17:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Move Duja► 08:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

---

American National Biography says, Giovanni da Verrazzano; that other encyclopedia likewise, noting it is also spelled Verrazano. The Columbia Encyclopedia uses Verrazano, and says it is sometimes spelled Verrazzano. Wroth's The Voyages of Giovanni da Verrazzano seems like a definitive work. I say we move the page to Giovanni da Verrazzano and note the other spelling as alternate. I'd avoid words like 'correct' when talking about English spelling. Tom Harrison ^Talk 16:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

OK thus I start the poll with (I got the permission from the former message to put the Tom Harrison preference]]

The 3-volume Literature of Travel Exploration: An Encyclopedia (2003) uses Giovanni da Verrazzano, as do all the works in the articles bibliography. I agree with Tom's suggestion to rename to Giovanni da Verrazzano and note the sometimes alternate spelling. -- Stbalbach 16:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Vote for moving page to Giovanni da Verrazzano:

• support --Attilios 16:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• support Tom Harrison ^Talk 16:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC) (see before)
• support -- Stbalbach 16:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hey I need help

Im doing a project and need this info about Giovanni Da Verrazano and need this information

1. 1 Important discoverys
2. 2why is discovery impotant to the united states?
3. 3About his family

Please Help and get back to me thank you!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.165.92.58 (talk) 19:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC).

Florentine or Italian

Regarding this sentence: Giovanni da Verrazzano was an Italian explorer versus this sentence: Giovanni da Verrazzano was a Florentine explorer

I don't agree [with Florentine]. Florence is today just a city. We should begin to write a Paduan, a Mantuan, a Cagliaritan etc. artist for each of the cities they come from? OK, Florence was once a country of its own, but this, at Verrazzano's times, was true for at lease 100 other Italian entities. I think you can find such a distinction between old Italian states only in old-fashioned encyclopedias like Britannica and Catholic. Bye. --Attilios 18:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

When writing history we use the historic name. Sometimes the modern name is used in parens, like (in modern Florence) -- this is standard throughout Wikipedia. -- Stbalbach 18:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand: what do you mean with "historical name"?!? We are speaking of countries, not names. And, in Wikipedia is standard to cite its current (equivalent, or cultural) nationality. So, you have a lot of people from former Germany which is cited as German painter, composer etc, not "Saxon painter" or "Prussian composer" etc. Bye. --Attilios 17:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, there is no absolutist Wikipedia rule, it is done different ways depending on the context and historical situation. In this case it is relevant and important, historically, to mention he was from Florence (and not, say, Genoa, another important place for Italian explorers). We speak of Constantinople and Istanbul depending on what time period it is, so yes we do use the historical names. Italian is ethnicity, there was no nation of Italy, Florentine is place of origin and more specific (there was no "nation" of Florence, it was akin to a commune). In any case since the compromise solution was reverted its going to have to be a straw poll as the next step. -- Stbalbach 19:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Straw poll: Florence or not in lead section?

This is a straw poll for input on the first sentence of the article. Should it be mentioned he was a Florentine, or Italian, or both?

• Florentine or Both. Some form of wording that said he was both an Italian and a Florentine, although it is somewhat redundant, so just saying he was Florentinian, as the article was originally[1], would be fine. Italian is ethnicity, and Florentine is place of origin (there was no nation of Italy at the time). It is relevant and important, historically, to mention he was from Florence and not, say, Genoa, another important place for Italian explorers and which was a competitor of Florence. -- Stbalbach 19:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Italian. da Verrazzano was in service of the French, so his achievements are not particularly related to Florence. Because of that, I think Attilios (talk · contribs)'s reasoning should be applied here. --User:Krator (t c) 13:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)shut up stupid
• Italian. Had you asked the man himself, he would have said "Florentine" but he wouldn't be talking to ignorant people around the world, some of whom don't know a Florentine from a Floridian. In the body of the article, omit "Italian" and make sure Florentine or at least a few instances of Florence are properly linked. Jim.henderson 02:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Extensive revision

I have extensively revised the article. Before was a messy crap devoting just to death and to reputation, and nothing about life and the details of his North American voyage. Hope you'll enjoy.

Mapping of north America

This line seems odd: "The continent would not be fully mapped until almost the 20th century. "

I take it to mean the arctic parts of Canada weren't mapped until then, but makes it sound like Verrazzano's error was a VERY long time in being corrected. Previous revisions mentioned it took a century.

75.165.55.86 (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

drak shyt

sulphur sprangz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.254.225.25 (talk) 17:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

verrazano

hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.159.71 (talk) 23:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Death of Verrazano

The very definite statement that he was eaten by cannibals (who could prove that?), who left leftovers that were shared with his family is very colorful, but probably there's far too much uncertainty (disputed for centuries) to leave this as it stands today. Twang (talk) 16:47, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Map is inaccurate

Verrazzano entered Penobscot Bay, his last landfall prior to passing Nova Scotia and reaching Newfoundland, thereafter he returned to France. Ekem (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

French at his heart?? At the moment the section on the “origins” shows a clear attempt to make the Italian Giovanni da Verrazzano into a Frenchman

The section presents as outdated and “traditional” the reliable and widely known studies that describe Giovanni Da Verrazzano as Italian, while a couple of unreliable nationalistic sources describing him as a Frenchman are presented as recent and accepted by the academies. The nationalistic attempt fails since the very beginning: a check on the actual reliability of the sources used to fool the reader will suffice.

The sources used in order to describe the Italian explorer Giovanni da Verrazzano as a Frenchman are said to be both academic and recent, but that’s not really true. They’re either old or parochial and so unreliable. The first one is a page written by an anonymous entity on the site of the Embassy of France in Washington DC, which is not exactly an academy. The second one is a book written 50 years ago, so that it’s not exactly a recent source, different from what the section claim (“More recent scholarly suggested that Verrazzano was born in Lyon..”): besides this article written by Jack Habert is known for being basically about nationalistic French claims in North America and its history. The third source is from a publisher settled in… Lyon and only this article on the Wikipedia cites it in the whole net: Boucher, Alain (2006). Jean de Verrazane : un lyonnais découvre le site de New-York. Try to search for it: since it is so reliable and widely accepted by so important “recent scholars”, why don’t we find anything about it?

The fact is that wherever you search, objective studies have no doubt in identifying the explorer as Italian.

The contradiction between what the section claim about the reliability of the sources as being “more recent scholarly” and what these sources actually are makes it evident an attempt to fool the reader.

Corrections and more reliable sources are needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.162.129 (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

The best work I've seen on Verrazzano is Lawrence C. Wroth's The Voyages of Giovanni da Verrazzano, Yale University Press, 1970 (in fact, this whole article would benefit from being checked against that book, if anyone has the time). Wroth points out (page 7) that there is no primary source to confirm Giovanni's Florentine birth, which is therefore based on tradition. Wroth also summarizes the alternate theory put forth by Habert, who used primary (but circumstantial) sources to argue that the explorer was born in Lyon, the son of Florentine expatriates Giovanna Gadagne and Alessandro di Bartolommeo da Verrazzano. Without a birth certificate or similar document, however, we can't be certain. Eulalie Écho (talk) 03:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

A "French nationalistic attempt" : totally ridiculous ! Nobody would think that with such a name he is a stock Frenchman and true Nationalists would reject him as a "rital" (bad word for Italians). I just think that some people from Lyon (proud of their city and its history) would like to count him among their local celebrities. Nortmannus (talk) 08:50, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Nobody is claiming that Verrazzano was a "stock Frenchman". Again, Habert argues that he was the son of emigrants from Florence to Lyon. It's interesting to note that one of the main sponsors for Verrazzano's voyages was a banker from Lyon named Gadagne, the same name as Giovanni's mother according to Habert. Much historical work is colored by nationalism, but that doesn't mean you can dismiss it without evidence. If you have evidence that he was born in Italy, historians would be interested in seeing it! Cheers, Eulalie Écho (talk) 18:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)