Talk:Giovanni da Verrazzano

The Giovanni Da Verrazano teller I've changed Verrazano Narrows to the more correct Narrows which is the historical name for the strait between Long Island and Staten Island. Although "Verrrazano Narrows" has gained coinage in recent years to refer to strait, it is, as far I can tell a result of confusion based on the name of the bridge, which was named Verrazano Narrows Bridge because it spanned the Narrows and also commerorated Giovanni da Verrazano, not because it because spanned a (non-existant) strait called the "Verrazano Narrows." Decumanus 08:29, 17 Jan 2004 "...Verrazano made 3 more voyages...on the second... he was killed." Someone who knows what they are talking about should fix this. david 25 Jan 2004

It's being done. This article does not do justice to Verrazzano and I've been collecting material for a much better and thorough article. I've been reading through the logs of his voyage in order to write a nice summary of what actually happened. As for his death, the best sources I can find say he was hanged by the Spanish (since he spent much of his career preying on their ships).Jan 26,2004

the personal life of Giovanni De Verrazano that you can help me study. Other than that I understand every thing that you have given me. Thanks for all your help on my project, and your time, but if you could really help me please type back.

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)Reply

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}

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}

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)Reply

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 stupidReply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply
• 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 stupidReply
• 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)Reply

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.

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)Reply

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)Reply

On the image can be read morto nel MDXXV (dead in 1525), which doesn't agree with the date of death published on this article (1528). Which is right ? --Aldo Caruso (talk) 14:30, 22 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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)Reply

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 coloured 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)Reply

I was just laughing at the words of the first one who wrote up there. personally I do not give a damn if he was French or Italian und I absolutly do not know.Nortmannus (talk) 19:51, 31 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I can't help laughing at the jingoistic comments that begin this discussion either! The sources cited in the article for his French birth are 1.) The Embassy of France in Washington, DC. (with an external link; 2.) Habert, Jacques (1964). La vie et les voyages de Jean de Verrazane. Montréal & Ottawa: Cercle du livre de France. p. 182. (a very credible work); and 3.) Boucher, Alain (2006). Jean de Verrazane : un lyonnais découvre le site de New-York. Lyon: University Claude Bernard Lyon-1 (this is a peer reviewed, publication from a renown university - but, I suppose publications from Princeton or Yale universities are not good enough for this guy, either.) ---- I am removing the "unreliable source" insertions for the article because the sources are certainly reliable, and they were put there by an Anonymous editor. Charvex (talk) 06:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Follow-up: For discussion's sake, here is a translation of the statements about the contoversy of Verrazzano's birth from the article at French Wikipédia (the translation is my own - go to that article to see sources:) Since the year 1920, this assumption [of Verrazzano's birth in Italy] is largely undermined and it is now widely considered that he was born in Lyon to a distant branch of a family emigrated from Florence, although no birth certificate has been found. The most likely hypothesis is that he is the son of Alessandro di Bartolommeo da Verrazzano and Giovanna Gadagne, who were married in 1480 in Lyon. His kinship to the wealthy Gadagne family [through his mother's line] explains the unwavering financial support that gave him the banker Thomas II Gadagne (who was probably his uncle) for his expeditions. He lived much of his life in Lyon and Paris, where he was presented to the Court and adopted the French spelling his name Jean Verazzane, the name under which he appears in the texts written in his lifetime. -- Clearly, a controversy exists (and some Italophiles seem to deny opposing facts presented by credible historical researchers). Charvex (talk) 07:15, 4 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

No reliable source has been added since I first declared how unrealable and partisan the (French) sources used to assume that Giovanni da Verrazzano was born in Lyon are. Now I reply to some observation. "The sources cited in the article for his French birth are 1.) The Embassy of France in Washington, DC. (with an external link.." Yes, and tell me, is a short internet page written by an anonymous French diplomat reliable? You've to show statements written by scholars confirming what the article claims to be a general academic consensus about the French birth of Giovanni da Verrazzano. But this is something you're not able to show, because those statements on the disputed section are false. "2.) Habert, Jacques (1964). La vie et les voyages de Jean de Verrazane. Montréal & Ottawa: Cercle du livre de France.": Sorry? How is that a very credible work when it is clearly parochial and partisan? The author of the disputed section claims that the sources used in order to describe the Italian explorer Giovanni da Verrazzano as a Frenchman are recent, on the disputed section it has been said that there is a general consensus amongst nowadays scholars about the French birth of Giovanni da Verrazzano... but the article you mention has been written more than 50 years ago. Where is the recent reliable source confirming the claim? That's not really the one. And I repeat that the article written by Jack Habert is known for being basically about nationalistic French claims in North America and its history "3.) Boucher, Alain (2006). Jean de Verrazane : un lyonnais découvre le site de New-York. Lyon: University Claude Bernard Lyon": I can't really read this essay and I can't even read anything about it. How is that possible if you claim that there's a general consensus amongst scholars about the French birth of Giovanni da Verrazzano? So why is this supposed to have been written in one essay dating back to the 60s and another one that none except you mentions in the whole net? Such "sources" cannot really confirm the astonishing claim. You need something more to dare to deny what was "traditionally established", sorry.

Follow-up: So, before you delete the tags I've added in order point out that the 3 sources which have been used are not reliable (neutral, recent and academic). I mean... the disputed section claims that a general consensus amongst scholars identifies Giovanni da Verrazzano as of French birth. If that's the case, why is it so difficult for you to add some recent, academic source in English, a source that can be directly consulted, a source that's from an essay written out of France? Does such a source even exist? Even in France you've not even been able to find more than an old essay which is widely known for being about French nationalistic claims on the North American history and another one that none mentions in the whole Net except you. This should be enough to prove those disputed statements are actually false.

As far as I am concerned, the dispute has been solved! I’ve slightly corrected those sentences which sounded a bit mystificatory and exaggerated. No source has been deleted and nothing has been hidden: the “Lyonnais hypothesis” is still there, but it’s clearly stated that the general consensus among historians is that Giovanni da Verrazzano was born in Greve, Florence. I think none should complain now. Thank you. Vittuone (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)VittuoneReply

verrazzano was rediscovered by a frenchman living in new york named Jacques Habert author of "When new york was called Angoulême" published in ny in 1949 (based on his thesis statement presented at the university of comlombia and paris sorbonne). in 1964 the new york times hailed Jacques Habert as the "godfather" of the verrazano bridge since no one in usa remembered about verrazano (american historian Murphy who's quoted in the current wikipedia article thought that verrazano was a corsair named Jean Fleury...). the bridge was about to be called hudson bridge but there was a buzz about Jacques Habert's thesis and the bridge was christened verrazano for he is the real discoverer of the ny bay (long before englishman hudson). "Judging from the great emotion in the French community over the opening of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, one might think that the explorer was born in France. And maybe he was." wrote philip h. dougherty in the new york times of november 19, 1964 (in the article called "FRENCHMEN HAIL VERRAZANO HERE; Delegation Flies In to Help Open Bridge on Saturday"). Jacques Habert discovered verrazzano archives at Rouen in france and wrote biographies ("La Vie et les voyages de Jean de Verrazane" in 1964 and "Verrazane : Quand New York s'appelait Angoulême" in 1993) where he claims that verrazzano is actually born in Lyon, france in 1481 (not 1485!) which is the reason why there is now a public college in lyon called Jean de Verrazane... Madame Grinderche (talk) 13:22, 30 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

I originally added "so was Verrazzano executed by cannibalism? Or are you saying that there is controversy, but not actually saying this?". Can anyone please provide some clarification for this and sources? Thanks. --14.200.68.118 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:29, 5 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

There seems to be a controversy about the spelling of the name [www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/nyregion/some-see-the-verrazano-bridge-others-see-a-big-typo.html] and although the spelling with one Z was promoted at the time by the executive director of the Italian Historical Society of America based on the way Verraz[z]ano spelled his own name, there now seems to be a consensus that the correct spelling is with two Z's. Can anybody explain why the correct spelling should be one or the other?--2604:2000:C54F:E500:1DA2:38CF:26EE:15C0 (talk) 13:13, 15 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Giovanni da Verrazzano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120115081116/http://www.verrazzano.org/en/index2.php?c=vita to http://www.verrazzano.org/en/index2.php?c=vita
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905143439/http://www.verrazzano.org/en/index2.php to http://www.verrazzano.org/en/index2.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:44, 5 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• GiovanniRehobothMonument.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:21, 30 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

According to this article, Verrazzano was "first European to explore the Atlantic coast of North America between Florida and New Brunswick in 1524". However, the entry for Sebastian Cabot (explorer) states that he sailed south to Chesapeake Bay in the spring of 1509. Which one is it?

User:CycloneYoris, the cited page describes Verrazzano's exploration of Narragansett Bay, but it doesn't say he was the first. 144.96.41.37 (talk) 23:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Reply