Talk:Liber sine nomine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Each and every letter?!?

I see no reason why this article should contain a synopsis of each letter in the book. Unless someone supplies a good reason why the synopses need to be here, I will remove them soon. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That one is easy - out of hundreds of letters that Petrarch wrote these particular 19 each have special significance pertaining to the criticism of the Avignon papacy. They could not be put in Epistolae familiares because of the controversal nature contained in each of these letters. I don't know how many letters Petrarch wrote exactly, however I know it is over 600. So 19 out of 600 is a small percentage and each letter has very special significance pertaining to the Avignon papacy criticisms. Many other editors have read over these synopsis and some have made additional contributions to individual letters. Its obvious that in the future other editors will contribute to additional letters with information.--Doug ^talk 18:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's evidence of the significance of the collection, not of each letter. --Akhilleus (talk) 18:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

removed image

I removed this image of a book cover: I'm afraid I don't understand our fair use policy all that well, but this image is a potential copyright violation, so I've removed it from the article. It's not essential to the article, in any case, so we'd be safer to leave it out. --Akhilleus (talk) 01:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

There's a massive amount of plagiarism in this article. The large introduction to this article is largely taken from the introduction to Zacour's translation of the sine nomine, even though Zacour is nowhere cited. The lack of citation in itself is plagiarism; in addition, text is closely copied from Zacour or other sources, including this website: [1]. (The version of the Wikipedia article referred to is the revision of 21:35, 9 July 2007.)

In the preface to Sine nomine Petrarch writes that he had kept these special 19 letters from the other larger collection of Epistolae familiares so that the reader could destroy this smaller collection without destroying the larger collection altogether. This really was a transparent conceit. The real reason was that Epistolae familiares would receive a much better reception without these controversial letters. (Wikipedia)
By pulling them together instead of leaving them scattered throughout the Familiares, Petrarch says, he could make it easy for any reader whom they angered to destroy them without disrupting the larger collection -- a transparent conceit. The real advantage was Petrarch's, for his Familiares would receive a much better reception without these letters than with them... (Zacour, p. 20)

The earliest of the 19 letters may have been written around 1342 with the latest appearing about 1359. (Wikipedia)
The earliest of the 19 letters may have been written as early as 1342 and the latest appears to come from 1359. (http://www.loselle.com/neh/jewell.htm)

These letters without names contain neither a description of any pope's faults or any call to some action required. (Wikipedia)
These letters without names contain neither a systematic examination of the papacy’s faults nor an overt call to specific action. (http://www.loselle.com/neh/jewell.htm)

There will be found here in this collection only names of ancient authors, classical people, mythical figures, and biblical characters. (Wikipedia)
There are no names of contemporaries anywhere in the book. The only names to be found are those of classical, biblical, and mythical figures, and of ancient authors. (Zacour, p. 21)

The 19 letters in Liber sine nomine, withheld from publication until Petrarch’s death (made available to the public 1397), form a single book which is based on the theme of two cities. The first Petrarch referred to as Jerusalem, the rightful center of the world, the chaste and beautiful, though sometimes ravished, Lady. This being of course Rome. He referred to the second city (Avignon) as Babylon on the Rhone, the labyrinth, the sewer, the pustule, the brassy and corrupt harlot exalted beyond her degree, who lords it over her Lady Rome, thinking the Lady is dead or vanquished. (Wikipedia)
The nineteen letters in the Liber Sine Nomine, withheld from publication until Petrarch's death, form a single book, a Liber, on the theme of two cities: Rome, referred to as "Jerusalem," "Sion," "the rightful center of the world," the chaste and beautiful, though sometimes ravished, Lady; and Avignon, "Babylon-on-the-Rhone," "the labyrinth," the "sewer," the "pustule," the brassy and corrupt harlot exalted beyond her degree, who lords it over her Lady Rome, thinking the Lady is dead or vanquished. (http://www.loselle.com/neh/jewell.htm)

Giuseppe Francassetti, who published Petrarch’s Epistolae familiares letters in both Latin and Italian in 1859, refused to print Petrarch's Liber sine nomine because in Francassetti's words it was as being unworthy of a Catholic and a Franciscan tertiary. (Wikipedia)
Guiseppe Francassetti, who published Petrarch's other letters in both Latin and Italian in 1859, refused to print Sine Nomine "as being unworthy of a Catholic and a Franciscan tertiary" but in 1885 it was translated into French, and in 1895, Italian. At that time the collection received its first significant study. (http://www.loselle.com/neh/jewell.htm. Interestingly, this website is not giving appropriate credit to Zacour, pp. 12-13, from which this is ultimately drawn.)

Fewer than one percent of the nearly 700 entries on the subject of Petrarch in WorldCat appear to deal with Petrarch’s Book Without A Name, perhaps because the name inplies it is a volume without a title. (Wikipedia)
Fewer than one percent of the 678 entries on the subject of Petrarch in WorldCat, an international on-line card catalogue, appear to deal with the work. (http://www.loselle.com/neh/jewell.htm)

Petrarch created a book written to posterity, a book highly rhetorical in nature, which called into question the virtue and future of the whole institution of the Avignon papacy as it existed then in the Fourteenth Century. (Wikipedia)
Thus in his Liber Sine nomine, Petrarch created a book written to posterity, a book highly rhetorical in nature, which called into question the virtue and future of the whole institution of the papacy as it existed in Avignon. (http://www.loselle.com/neh/jewell.htm)

Sadly, this does not exhaust the plagiarism that can be found in this article. Some of the summaries of the letters are drawn from the introductions in Zacour's translation--I won't bother with the details right now, but if you've got Zacour in hand the copying becomes obvious. Other summaries are drawn from http://www.loselle.com/neh/jewell.htm. For instance, the summary of letter 19 begins "Letter 19 indulges in bellicose oxymorons..." drawn straight from the website.

Since virtually every paragraph of this article is tainted by plagiarism, I'm reducing it to a stub. --Akhilleus (talk) 06:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Akhilleus, the plagiarism you've documented is both extreme and clear. The reduction of the article is entirely appropriate. Wareh 15:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image and info on letters should be allowed

.

The image is my picture I did and is not a scan or photograph of a book. The original medieval two-dimensional artwork within the picture was done in Paris around 1470. Since the original artwork is over 500 years old, it is in public domain. I just added colors to the original artwork and did not modify it other than that. I put on my picture I made the wording: Petrarch's The Book Without A Name Sine nomine. Review the file picture upload history and prior images which will reveal I made this image myself, based upon the original 1470 artwork.

The contents of the letters should be allowed since this is basically what Petrarch's book is all about. It has unique information about each letter, who it was sent to, and why. When it was available to the public editors about 6 month ago, others participated with additional information on certain letters and made improvements on the various letters. This shows there is interest in each of the letters and they should be allowed to be made available to the public even though it is a controversal issue related to the Catholic church and the Avignon papacy history. This article should not outright be censored, "stubified", or deleted without first allowing third opinions from other editors and some additional administrators. While it is a controversal subject, it is a notable important subject related to Petrarch's writings. Additionally it also provides unique information about each recipient and why it was sent to them, which is usually a humanist renainasance person in their own right and is almost always a close friend of Petrarch. Many new biographies have since been added that relate directly to this writing of Petrarch's Book Without A Name and link directly to this article or from this article to a new medieval period biography. It has as well certain philosophy ideas of the beginning of the Renaissance and medieval political concepts.--Doug ^talk 23:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wheel of Fortune showing Lady Fortune is also depicted in an edition from Paris 1467 of Bocaccio's De Casibus Virorum Illustrium ( "On the Fates of Famous Men" ).--Doug ^talk 14:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liber sine nomine. 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/20070610075502/http://www.bibliotecaitaliana.it:6336/dynaweb/bibit/autori/p/petrarca/epistole_sine_nomine to http://www.bibliotecaitaliana.it:6336/dynaweb/bibit/autori/p/petrarca/epistole_sine_nomine/

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) 05:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]