Talk:Lorenzo de' Medici

Untitled

Did he actually win any of those beauty contests??? -- Marj Tiefert, Sunday, April 14, 2002  ;-)

Almost every one to my knowledge -- he was a very powerful and attractive person. --maveric149

Hmph! -- musta bin having a bad face day when they did the bust then... (Marj)

To Marj It's "Must have Been " but anyway, I'm a High School Student I go to Conley High (D. H. Conley High School) and we are learning about him in class this semester so i decided to look him up because I wanted to know a little bit more about him. Sincerely Lashonda S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.52.231.14 (talk) 00:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Speaking of the bust, we really need a picture of that here. It's one of the most famous renditions of him. I'm going to add it to the article, since Wikicommons has it. -- Gwern (contribs) 06:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Lorenzo is generally described as being somewhat homely. The pageants referred to are actually Medieval tournaments, in which he often competed in his youth. -- Jnc 19:48, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)

What's up with that thing he's wearing? Is he getting a haircut? Taco325i 04:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

---

I removed this text:

The great rival family of the Medici clan was the Sforza, the most famous of whom was Francesco.

because a) it's wrong, the Sforza were allies more than rivals, and ii) it's in the wrong entry - Francesco was aided to power by Cosimo the Elder. At some point we should move it.. -- Jnc 19:48, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

There is (in Wikipedia!) vacillation between "Lorenzo de Medici" and "Lorenzo de' Medici" (same for other members of the family). As far as I know, there is in Italian no preposition "de". "de'" stands for "dei", a form which includes the definite article (plural). -- S. User:217.168.172.202 20:45, 27 Aug 2002

This is an English language encyclopedia so the most common form is "de" not "de'". --mav

This is a little disorganized, because almost all the Medici pages use plain "de", but two (Giovanni di Bicci and Piero the Unfortunate) use "de'". Just to make things complicated, it appears that the correct usage is actually "de'" (short for "della", I think).

The easiest proposal would be to use plain "de" throughout, which would mean renaming the "Piero de' Medici" page; unless someone wants to be really energetic and fix them all. (I'd also like to ditch the redirect from "Piero" - really, it's just a common given name, and doesn't deserve to be linked to him.)

Also, given the recurrence of names through the dynasty, we might want to consider using the form most historians use, which is the full X di Y de' Medici - e.g. Piero the Unfortunate is properly "Piero di Lozeno de' Medici". -- Jnc 19:48, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)

He is most commonly known as Lorenzo de Medici in the English speaking world. So that is where the article should be unless a specific naming convention says otherwise. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). --mav 23:28, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Ummm, "Lorenzo I de' Medici" turns up 49 matches on Google, "Lorenzo de' Medici" about 16,600. Didn't you just point me at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), where it says "Use the most common name of a person or thing"? Even "Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici", which you just deprecated, turns up 164, more than "Lorenzo I de' Medici". Noel 04:33, 15 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Just trying to balance consistency vs. use. I'll change it back since this Lorenzo is by far the most famous. --mav

---

On the second to the last paragraph there is a link to Lorenzo's brother Giovanni who I believe is Pope Leo X, but the link goes to Pope Leo XI who is Alessandro de' Medici. Is this just a simple typo? I don't know enough about this to be sure and change the link. (jtu) -- User:24.153.226.8 21:00, 12 Feb 2004

Lorenzo's brother was Giuliano - he was assassinated when they were both still young, and never held a major post. Lorenzo's son Giuliano (I know, confusing :-) was named after him.

jtu, good call-

Lorenzo the Magnificent's brother Giuliano had an illegitimate son named Giulio who became Pope Clement VII.

Lorenzo's sons were Piero, Giovanni (who became Pope Leo X) and Giuliano. Piero in turn named his own son Lorenzo (how confusing) and this younger Lorenzo's illegitimate son Alessandro was a duke, but never a cardinal or pope.

Hope that clears things up a little.

Also, I vote for the use of "de" because it is indeed and English-language encyclopedia; however, for serious scholarship, it is correct to use " de' " as the abbreveation for the Italian word "DEI."

(crawfoem) -- User:149.150.236.250 13:44, 26 Feb 2004

Is it possible that "de'" is actually short for "della" - this form is found in other Italian names from the period (e.g. the della Roveres).

We have chosen to use the "de'" form for the articles because it is the correct form. However, to be encylopedic about it, there are links from the "de" form of the name for every article. Noel 21:02, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

De or Di de or di

Basically de would be used in Northern Italy or spain as a connector between generational names. De would be the actual form of a new "last name" in Spain or Northern Italy. In southern italy the Di form is used. I am a Di Lorenzo. My family is from Sessa Aurunca, (near Naples) and we took our name from Lorenzo de Medici. Haven't taken the time to trace whether it is a blood connection or a name given. I visited a cousins home in Sessa,(46-room former monastary with an underground connection to the city cathedral)and know that our family had once been very wealthy. My branch of the family were tailors for the last 150-years or so and we made clothes for the clergy and the wealthy. This trade was practiced after the Italian civil war, which Naples lost. Conditions in southern Italy grew increasingly worse and we came to America early this century. I maintain contact with my cousins to this day. From Royalty to a salesman in America! :-) LOL -- User:172.203.194.38 21:31, 25 Mar 2004

Actually, the Medici used the "di" to separate generational names, too. So this Lorenzo is "Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici", in full. The "de'" is part of the family name (like the "della" in "della Rovere"). Noel (talk)

The family certainly uses "de'Medici" in modern times, I've worked with one for ten years. Basic Italian grammar: "de" means "of", but combines with the following definite article "il"(m), "la"(f) or "gli"(pl) to give "del", "della" and "dei". As noble families are numerous, they almost always have plural names ("Orsini", for example, being "the clan from Orsino") which usually takes a "dei" provided the following Family name doesn't start with a vowel, as that would create a glottal stop, hated by Italians (dei Orsini, for example, being a complete non-starter: it can't elide into "de'Orsini" either, and "d'Orsini" loses the definite article so completely it becomes nonsense - on the other hand, returning to this context, because M is a soft consonant, "dei Medici" elides into "de'Medici", even though a vestigial "i" remains in the pronunciation). The Sforzas, being imposed on Milan from outside Italy, aren't recognised as nobility, but as a (demonic?) Power, and therefore are the exception proving the point. To take Jnc's point further, Lorenzo's full name places him with greater accuracy in the clan, naming the father as well to remove potential confusing with other Lorenzos in the way you describe: it's simply shorthand for "son of", much like the French usage, "Jean de Florette" or Icelandic "Magnus Magnusson". A relevant example is Giuliano de Piero de'Medici and Giuliano de Lorenzo de'Medici, uncle and nephew, ruler of Florence and Pope, respectively: see the Medici discussion for a fuller Wiki debate. The word Medici means "quack doctor", and the family heraldic symbol, (a minimum of) 3 balls, refers to the pills by which the family is thought to have made its fortune with during the Black Death in the late 1340s. User:Jel 05:32, 1 Nov 2006 [UTC]

Picture

There seems no valid reason for the image to have been removed Nov. 14. I think it should be restored. Hu 18:40, 2004 Nov 14 (UTC).

Since no comment has been made, I have reverted to include the image again. Hu 19:41, 2004 Nov 14 (UTC)

Almost certainly just vandalism. Noel (talk) 00:06, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

The chapel called the "Medici Chapel" in Firenze is a separate building, quite imposing and recently renovated, which houses the tombs of the Medici rulers. The smaller chapel, accessible through the main chapel, was designed in its entirety by Michelangelo Buonarotti, and the two tombs it contains are recorded as being the tombs of Lorenzo the Magnificent and Giuliano. I have been there many times. Original working drawings by Michelangelo are still visible on the walls of one alcove. I have not changed the text, lest it be thought to be vandalism, but would like approval to do so. Anthony.bradbury 16:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Is not the second paragraph here, apart from being grammatically incorrect, distinctly POV? Anthony.bradbury 22:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I changed the text; in my innocence I had not at first realised that I was looking at vandalism. But I learn fast.--Anthony.bradbury 23:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Why does some idiot keep mucking about with this page? I have just corrected the latest idiocy. Anthony.bradbury 22:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Tomb

I have made a significant change to the part of the article relating to the Michelangelo chapel. I have been there many times. Anthony.bradbury 22:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Machiavelli

"The Prince" was written for the grandson of this Lorenzo.

--199.17.27.5 17:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)bill

The fact that Lorenzo de' Medici ruled the Florantine Republic is mentioned a number of times in the article, as well as in those of the other Medici rulers. I believe this to be in error for at the time of the Medici rule it was more a city-state than a republic. Only after its conquer, and subsequent rule by Girolamo Savonarola in 1494 did it take on the properties of a republic. This inspired the writing of 'The Prince' by N. Machiavelli. User: ?unsigned

The above text appears to be unsigned: my contribution is inserted here, my apologies if I butt in. Il Principe was a job application to Giuliano de'Medici: Machiavelli had risen with the Republic to the post of Chancellor and Secretary to the Second Chancery, the Ten of Liberty and Peace, and hoped his experience would be of more value to the new rulers when the Medici returned to power in 1512 than his previous affiliations weighed against him. In his own words, "I pour myself out as fully as I can in meditation on the subject, discussing what a principality is, what kinds there are, how they can be acquired, how they can be kept, why they are lost": in other words, "you need me to avoid making the same kind of mistakes which lost you Florence in 1494, lost Savonarola it in 1498, and which will lose you it yet again." He did not - could not, in the circumstances that he had already been under arrest - praise the Republic as such, although he does argue that a collaborative relationship between a population listened to by its Prince is an optimal model. User:Jel 0730 1 Nov 2006 [UTC]

Florence excommunicated the Pope?

I've just copy-edited the piece a little, but I'm confused by this statement:

The Florentines promptly excommunicated the Pope...

Without further explanation, that doesn't make sense to me, because it's popes who do the excommunicating. Perhaps another form of words would better describe what sanctions the Florentines enacted at this point, but I haven't the facts of the matter to hand. Anyone know exactly what this refers to?qp10qp 12:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. What is "excommunicating the Pope" supposed to mean? (condorhero)

In Medieval to Renaissance times, Society was organised in a much more regionally structured way than is now the case. Just as the Medici family took and held political control in the Florentine Republic, so could they, if they wished, assume control of the Church in their area. Under orders, the Cardinal Archbishop performed an excommunication rite. As would be expected, this procedure was not accepted as lawful under canon law in Rome.--Anthony.bradbury 13:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

After the fallout of he Pazzi Conspiracy (which involved the hanging of a Priest involved in the conspiracy), Florence was excommunicated by the Pope. It was done to try to turn the people against the Medici by literally putting the fear of God's damnation into them but it failed. <- I'm paraphrasing from memory from the Paul Strathern book "Medici - Godfathers of the Renaissance"

Art additions?

the art that lorenzo needs to be added to this page because people need his famous art ,paintings,sculptures, and architecture..

(The above comment was originally added to the article itself by anonymous user 12.4.222.41.)

Agree that the article could be expanded a little, but I think that it already gives some indication of what Lorenzo sponsored. Could you explain what you'd like to see? —Ryan McDaniel 15:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

One might also include links to the Uffizi and Bargello pages User:Jel 05:57, 1 Nov 2006 [UTC]

2 development thoughts: 1. Is it worth separating the dynastic tree and genealogy pages out from the Medici page? These rulers were more influential in their time, for instance, than the Kings of Scotland, and provided two of the more influential female members of the French royal family (Catherine and Marie). 2. Can somebody please reindex this page and the Medici one? They're becoming chaotic.User:Jel 05:47, 1 Nov 2006 [UTC]

Cause of death?

Is there any current research on his possible cause of death? He was only 43, yet "died peacefully in his sleep." Antandrus (talk) 19:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

 mmm...I believe he died afflicted by the family illness - that being Gout. AprilBlood (talk) 13:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no real consensus on what killed him (some say lung infection) but whatever it was would definitely have been exacerbated by his gout.

STRANGER THAN STRANGE...

The article says that "as Lorenzo died, the tower of the church of Santa Reparata was allegedly struck by lightning".

How is that possible, considering the church of Santa Reparata didn't exist anymore, having been replaced - a long time before - by Santa Maria del Fiore?

Anyone?

P.S. Oh sorry - I just realised he died at Careggi, not in Florence. So, is there a church of Santa Reparata near the villa in Careggi? (Because if there is, it should be clarified. If there isn't, then my original question still stands. ;))

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.23.51 (talk) 00:30, August 28, 2007 (UTC) 

Despite the church of Santa Reparata being replaced by Santa Maria del Fiore, Florentines still often referred to Santa Maria del Fiore as Santa Reparata. It was one of the buildings many Quattrocento nicknames. Thus, the source does refer to the lightning striking Santa Maria de Fiore. Rtmisst (talk) 21:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Lorenzo's two wives

I have studied Lorenzo for thirty years and have never read anything about him being married twice. In this article it says he married Philippina of Savoy after the death of Clarice. I've politely challenged it by requesting a citation just in case new evidence has appeared, but really it should be deleted before it starts appearing all over the place.Poppismith (talk) 17:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Rux.pavelescu (talk) 21:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC) i deleted the blasphemy ....Philippina of Savoy was never his wife. she was an non-legitimate child of Philip of Savoy, perhaps same age as Lorenzo's youngest daughter. I doubt they ever even met. It's true that Lorenzo had several lovers, but as a spouse he only had the roman Clarice (other sources named her Claudia) Orsini.

Wealth

What could possibly be the meaning of this?: "This is roughly $40,000,000, not allowing for inflation or percentage of GDP."

What is being compared here? The currencies never exchanged, and if this apparently random figure does not "allow for inflation," then $40,000,000 in what year's currency. I think this figure will have to be removed. Perhaps a more meaningful measure or metaphor can be used, or it could be directly converted to weight in gold (around 200 Kilograms of gold?). zadignose (talk) 04:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

According to Paul Strathern's book on the Medici, they paid a tiny amount of tax compared to their actualy wealth (basically it was old fashioned tax evasion). So the numbers cited on the page, while interesting, are somewhat irrelevant as they don't reflect how wealthy the Medici really were. I'm going to remove the sentence for this reason and the reason above.

A gold florin contained 3.5g of gold - so it is not that difficult to figure out how much wealth we are talking about in contemporary currency.Hfeatherina (talk) 21:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Historical novels

Is The Prince an historical novel? I never knew that.Levalley (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Uh, ... I didn't know that either. I removed it from the list. Wonder how long that was there. Antandrus (talk) 21:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

In Popular Culture

Does it matter if he's mentioned in The Simpsons or the game, Assassin's Creed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.110.64 (talk) 20:46, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I just finished watching the Netflix series and the Lorenzo portrayed there was Lorenzo the Elder. I'll remove the reference if nobody objects. Snarf99 (talk) 04:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Can people stop adding that stupid bit about Shrek. First of all on the actual character page it lists about 5 possible inspirations yet DOESN'T mention Medici. And yet on this page it unequivocally states he was the inspiration with no source because no source exists it's purely a guess from the appearance of the famous bust. Further more while popular culture sections hardly matter this isn't even some movie or game based on the time period, it's a silly animated comedy that MAY OR MAY NOT have pulled SOME visual inspiration - it is not a portrayal of Medici. It does NOT belong.

2606:A000:6B04:3F00:6DDB:F84D:CC6D:4001 (talk) 23:27, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree. Lacking a reliable source it should stay out. Thank you for removing it. Antandrus (talk) 23:52, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Can we add 'Lorenzo Il Magnifico', a designer boardgame based on the general endeavour of his life.

Easter 1478

Sunday, April 26, 1478 is an impossible date for Easter. It can never fall later then April 25th. Easter 1478 should have been Sunday March 22nd. I know there was some uneasiness about the lunar tables drifting out of sync with reality by this time. It may have been more obvious this year because the full moon was really around March 18th and the tables said March 21st. The next full moon was around April 17th which by pure observation and ignoring the tables would make Easter April 19th. Is there a definitive source on April 26th being Easter? The church is very touchy about Easter and it seems odd they'd have moved it to April 26th for any reason. The concerns the church had about their lunar tables drifting away from reality eventually lead to the Gregorian calendar reformation. Skywayman (talk) 18:27, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Platonic Academy?

There was no "Platonic Academy" as posited by Della Torre in his famous, but now-outdated 1902 monograph Vita di Lorenzo il Magnifico: uomo, poeta, politico. The Platonic Academy has been the subject of much discussion over the past twenty years. It seems unlikely that Ficino ever taught in a school-like environment, but rather used the term “Academia” to describe his teaching methods. Neverthless, the Platonic Academy has become the emblematic for discussion groups among humanists concerned with philosophy and classical learning. See James Hankins, "Cosimo de’ Medici and the ‘Platonic Academy’, The Myth of the Platonic Academy of Florence, Lorenzo de’ Medici as a Patron of Philosophy, and The Invention of the Platonic Academy of Florence," in Humanism and Platonism in the Italian Renaissance, 2 vol., (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 2003-4) 2: 187-217, 219-72, 273-316, 351-95; Robert Black, “The philosopher and Renaissance culture,” in Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy, ed. James Hankins (Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 2007), 21-23; Christopher S. Celenza, “The revival of Platonic philosophy,” in Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy, ed. James Hankins (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007), 83.Hfeatherina (talk) 21:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

End of Florentine Renaissance?

I cut this

Lorenzo de' Medici died at the dawn of "The Age of Exploration"; Christopher Columbus would reach the "New World" only six months later. With his death, the center of the Italian Renaissance shifted from Florence to Rome, where it would remain for the next century and beyond.

. The New World bit isn't particularly relevant and ignores that it took a substantial amount of time before the repercussions of that discovery were understood in Europe. The latter portion is improperly substantiated and, i think, just untrue. Yes, Rome become more of a fulcrum for the arts after Lorenzo's death, but i think that has much more to do with the patronage of the Pope Julius II and the Medici Popes Leo X and Clement VII.Hfeatherina (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Date of Father's Death

On this page it claims that, "Lorenzo, groomed for power, assumed a leading role in the state upon the death of his father in 1469", but on the Piero de Medici page it states that he died in 1470. Don't know which it right but I thought I would bring it up. RichTBiscuit (talk) 01:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Turns out it was 1469, I'll edit it on the other page. RichTBiscuit (talk) 01:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

The Medicis were among the foremost bankers in Europe at the time

According to many authors and reliable sources, such as this, state that "The Medicis were among the foremost bankers in Europe at the time". I think that in order to add this on Wiki, the word "banker" has to be replaced by something else.--115ash^→(☏) 10:28, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Rome??? What has to do Lorenzo with Rome? Alex2006 (talk) 10:57, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Generally nothing. See these sources 1, 2. Probably I made mistake on writing it correctly. --115ash^→(☏) 11:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I've just removed that phrase. That needs clarification.--115ash^→(☏) 11:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

There is nothing to be clarified. Lorenzo was 100% Florentine, and the Medici was a family of Florence, period. The Medici reached great power in Rome too, but this was much later, with Leo X, Clement VII and Pius IV (all exponents of the Medici family), so, at the best, what this author writes is an anachronism. Alex2006 (talk) 11:22, 9 November 2015 (UTC)]

What had Lorenzo to do with Rome?!?!?? See Medici Bank: they were Papal bankers and had a (very lucrative) branch in Rome, going back to the days of Giovanni di Bicci de' Medici, when the Papacy returned from Avignon (1414). See also Pazzi Conspiracy: both Lorenzo and the Pope wanted to buy Imola from the Duke of Milan. Originally the Duke of Milan consented to sell it to Lorenzo for 100,000 ducats (May 1473), but then decided to sell it to the Pope instead -- for a mere 40,000 ducats and a politically advantageous marriage contract. Said Duke of Milan was then assassinated Christmas 1476 in a manner quite shockingly similar to the way Lorenzo's brother Giuliano met his maker . . . less than two years later (Easter 1478). Said Easter 78 stunt subsequently "justified" the incredibly prompt mass (hysterical) execution of alleged (aka untried) Pazzi Conspirators. The Pazzi, you see, had consented to loan the Pope the money he needed to buy Imola, after Lorenzo had specifically refused the Pope the very same loan. See: Professor Kenneth Bartlett's history of Renaissance Italy (University of Toronto). fb2ts, 24 February 2016.

Maybe it would be better that before writing something you read the edits that were discussed here some time ago: otherwise you risk, as you just did, to write things totally out of context. Object of discussion was the definition of Lorenzo in the lead as "the most powerful member of the Roman nobility". This is just delusional, sorry. Alex2006 (talk) 20:59, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Date of birth

In Florence at the time of Lorenzo's birth, New Year's Day was March 25th, NOT January 1st. Technically he was born on 1 January 1448. It needs an Old Style and New Style put in for date of birth. My reference is the book Magnifico by Miles J. Unger. 2600:1700:A9B0:527F:39B7:493A:37A7:93F9 (talk) 07:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC)