Disputatio:Ioannes Picus Mirandula

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Nomen[fontem recensere]

Angelus Politianus (Angelo Poliziano) in his letters consistently calls this man Ioannes Picus Mirandula. IacobusAmor 23:57, 17 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

I think so too -- only, are you sure it wasn't Ioannes Picus Mirandulae, as in della Mirandola? Unfortunately I wasn't able to check yesterday; therefore I merely corrected comites to comes, added a redirect, and left the rest alone! Massimo, do you have a source for Picco and Mirandulensis? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:10, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
It's always Mirandula in Angelo Poliziano: Letters: Volume I: Books I–4, edited by Shane Butler (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006), even in a letter from Pico himself (printed on pp. 26–31)—a historically useful letter, in that it alludes to the rebirth of Latin learning that Pico and Politianus were promoting: "Novicii sumus atque tirunculi, qui ex inscitiae tenebris pedem modo movimus, promovimus fere nihil. Benigne nobiscum agitur si inter studiosorum ordines referamur. Habet docti nomen quiddam aliud quod sit tibi et tui similibus peculiare; mihi tam grandia non conveniunt, cum eorum quae in literarum studiis sint praecipua, nihil non solum exploratum habeam, sed nec adhuc etiam nisi per transennam viderim conabor quidem, id quod nunc ago, talis esse aliquando qualem nunc me praedicas et esse aut iudicas aut certe velles." IacobusAmor 12:19, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I like that quotation a lot. Maybe we should put "Novicii sumus atque tirunculi" on the pagina prima. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:33, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
That's definitely apt for me! Perhaps it would be a consolation for others to know that our learned forebears felt the same sentiments. IacobusAmor 15:05, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Iohannes Reuchlin in libris De arte cabbalistica conscriptis in Epistula ad Leonem X. pont.max. eum Ioannem Picum Mirandulae comitem et in libro I., capite 13.P Ioannem Picum Mirandulanum comitem appellavit.--Irenaeus 15:37, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
That looks like an appositive, rather than a quasi surname: Ioannes Picus, Mirandulanus comes 'John Pico, the Mirandulan count'. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:45, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)

Pico, non Picco[fontem recensere]

1. His own letter referenced above says Pico.
2. Angelus Politianus uses the form Pico (see above).
3. In a poem in Greek elegiacs (pp. 26 in the book referenced above), Angelus Politianus calls him Πικος in the nominative and and Πικον in the accusative, not Πικκος and Πικκον. (Say, why aren't the vowels with circumflexes available among the litterae Graecae in the box below? Πικος and Πικον need a circumflex over the iota.) IacobusAmor 12:19, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
4. Vicipaedia already has the form Ioannes Picus Mirandula (though in the genitive, Ioannis Pici Mirandulae) in the article on one of his friends. You can look it up! IacobusAmor 13:26, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

That's another question! I always have to go and copy polytonic characters from en:Polytonic orthography#Examples of polytonic characters, but we need them fairly often. Maybe necessary to speak nicely to UV.
OK, not all painters can spell. That might explain the Picco on the painting. As for the final -o, I don't think we should rely on the painter for that either, if we have better sources. He may not have decided between Italian and Latin; or he may have intended a dative case. You have seen Picus and Πῖκος and so have I.
I have seen Ioannes Picus Mirandulae once; but if you have Ioannes Picus Mirandula, and as close to home as in letters from himself and from Poliziano, we should go with it, I would say. Let's wait and see if Massimo agrees. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
1. Yes, painters (except Leonardo & Michaelangelo) should stick to their limning! The name I see in the painting is IOAN•PICCO MIRANDVLA. IacobusAmor 13:23, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
2. Since the spellings may have been regularized by the editor of the Harvard edition, anybody who can consult the first edition (Aldo Manuzio, 1498) or any original MSS would be well advised to do so. IacobusAmor 13:15, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I have now found a precise source for the form you suggested at the top of this page: IOÃN•PICVS•MIRANDVLA on another painting, for which I've given a reference in a footnote. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:25, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

fons[fontem recensere]

the image on the page is the source of Ioan. Picco. Mirandulensis. --85.2.168.238 08:52, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

It supports Picco, but not Mirandulensis, unless your eyes can see more letters than I can. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:11, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

oops.. you 're right,sorry..--Massimo Macconi 13:43, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Then the weight of the evidence still seems to support Ioannes Pico Mirandula and Ioannes Pico, comes Mirandulensis as the preferred forms: Pico, not Picco. IacobusAmor 14:19, 26 Februarii 2008 (UTC)

Iterum de nomine[fontem recensere]

Usor:Viator recte, oculis intentis, in imagine seriei Iovianae verba "IOÃN PICVS e MIRANDVLA" legit, paginamque statim movit. Sed haec vera lectio ex uno fonte, non ex aliis in nota subiuncta citatis, dempsit. Alii fontes nonnulli certe "Ioannes Picus Mirandula" habent. Lemmata notasque subiunctas ergo correxi. An Viator recte moverit, incertus sum! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:51, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)

The weight of the evidence overwhelmingly supports some form other than one with a preposition e in it; therefore, today's move should be reverted. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:42, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
Salvete, nomen "Picus Mirandula" omnino falsum est quia Mirandula est nomen urbiculae non adiectivus. Igitur, latinitate mediaevali nominabatur "Picus e Mirandula" sive "Picus a Mirandula". Tamen eius opera edita habent nomen "PICUS MIRANDULANUS", e. g. Picus Mirandulanus. Forma Picus Mirandula omnino illatina est. Dicimus ita "Petrus Romanus" et non "Petrus Roma", "Maclavellus Florentinus" sive "e Florentia" et non "Maclavellus Florentia". Picus Mirandula nusquam invenitur. Euge. Annumque novum faustum felicem.--Viator (disputatio) 20:51, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
Fortasse non bene intellexistis hanc sententiam in libro citato : "Ioannes Picus Mirandulâ merito cognomine phoenix appellatus" in quo "Mirandula" est ablativo originis. Titulusque operis in quo haec sententia invenitur recta latinitate est "Opera omnia Ioannis Pici, Mirandulae Concordiaeque comitis". (count of Mirandula and of Concordia).--Viator (disputatio) 21:08, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
Non nego quin in recentioribus editionibid saeculi XVI mi forma "Picus Mirandula" inveniatur sed fortasse perperam. Mihi melioris latinitatis videtur esse "Picus Mirandulanus". Valete.--Viator (disputatio) 21:30, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)

Fons recensionis mense Martio 2020[fontem recensere]

Eisler, Rudolf: Philosophen-Lexikon. Berolini 1912, p. 544-545 (hic in interreti)