Talk:Dalmatian Italians/Archives/2007/November

Zadar coat of arms
I have so many objections on this article that I don't know where to begin... DIREKTOR you have edited the coat of arms of Zadar in the article "Dalmatian Italians"!? Do you know who is on that coat of arms and what is the symbolical historical meaning of that person for Zadar citizens? That is St. Krševan riding on the horse, a martyr and main saint-patron of Zadar. St. Krševan (Latin: Krisogon, Dalmatian: Grisogono) an Aquileian martyr from 4th century distinguished himself in age of banishment of Christians by the emperor Diocletian. According to legend he was connected to another martyr St. Stošija (Anastasia) also a Zadar saint patron (Stošija was popular Croatian name in 9th and 10th century in Zadar) Historically it's impossible to establish year when his body was replaced from Grad near Aquilea and brought to Zadar, by legend it happened in 649. First historical note about the church St. Krševan was given in the testament of the city mayor - prior Andrija in 918 (Andrija was a Croat, as well as the most other priors found already in the earliest documents from 9th and 10th centuries). There's no doubt that admiring of that saint in Zadar was older than that year. First abbot of renovated Benedictine monastery St. Krševan was a Zadar citizen abbot Madije (the end of 10th century). Prominent Zadar family Madi (maybe the most famous historical Zadar family at all) was in parentage to the Croatian royal house Trpimirović (Croatian queen Jelena was from Madi family). Zadar citizens gave him a title "monachum nostrum" in the documents - "our monach". The cult of St. Krševan meant strong dynamics, enrichment and a kind of spiritual bloom of religious, cultural, social and political life of Medieval Zadar (Zadar before Venetian occupation). Two Benedictine monasteries in Zadar St. Krševan and St. Marija (St. Mary) were actually in historical meaning the bastions of Zadar Croathood through all its history and places where old tradition of the liturgy written in Croatian language and Croatian Glagolithic alphabet was the longest saved in the area. Numerous gifts, vows to St. Krševan revealed the names of Zadar bishops, archbishops, priors and knights, Croatian Kings and Bans, traders and fishermen. A lot of Croatian names among them. St. Krševan monastery documentation archives proved, the best of all, connection of Zadar to Croatian inland and early Medieval joint of Romance and Croatian population in Zadar. St. Krševan was actually a symbol of Zadar citizens for indenpendence and freedom of their city. When foreigners Venetians, Frenchmen, Austrians were ruling the city the monastery St. Krševan was in political opposition living through outer and inner chrisis which ended with its abolition and closing in 1807 under French government, so that was how a few years after that Italian administration (under Austrians) lost their biggest "silent enemy". So, in short, putting that coat of arms in the article "Dalmatian Italians" is total absurd that makes me laugh and I'm sure it makes laughing anyone who knows something about Zadar history. Absurd as a lot of irrelevant statements written in this article. And what is the best of all, Venetians didn't change that symbol of Dalmatian resistance to them when they occupied Zadar in 15th century - is there any better proof how Dalmatia was Venetianized - nearly zero! Especially in ethnical meaning! Only administration and economy! Actually economy was their only motive and they never got far away from that point. For those who doesn't know Venetian administrators were using the translators for communication with native population - Dalmatians (read: Croats). 30% of Italians in Dalmatia in the end of 18th century is one of the most stupid claims that I have ever heard or read about Dalmatia. The presence of Venetians in Dalmatia is undisputable especially after 15th century, but nature of their presence was a lot different than it's presented here. However I'll discuss it in another section. Zenanarh 22:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

''San Grisogono was born near Aquileia, the biggest roman city in northeastern Italy, then buried in nearby Grado (100 kms from Venice). So, he was an Italian. Don't forget that Romans were the first to create the province "Italia" in their Empire under Augustus, so can be called Italians all their citizens living under the Alpine arch from the river Varus (near Nice) to the river Arsa (near Pola). So'', San Grisogono was a perfect symbol of Italianism in the coat of arms of Zara. ''And the coat of arms of Zara is the best symbol of the Dalmatian Italians, since Zara was their "Capital" for centuries. I believe that you, Zenanarth, are too much Croat nationalist. What has to do the closing of a monastery during Napoleon times with the Latins of Zara? It is your POV that the Italians were "silent enemies" of that monastery. As far as I know the French closed many other monasteries in Europe, but that was because of the ideals of the French Revolution against the Catholic Church. Nationalism, as we know now, was not present in those years in Europe''.--Cherso 21:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Ethnicity of the saint is irrelevant. He was important as symbol of freedom and indenpendence for Zadar citizens and in the age when this symbol appeared in the city there were no "Italian Dalmatians" at all. When first Italians came to Zadar in 15th century (after a few centuries of continual war between Zadar and Venice!) they were the last ones to be connected to the symbol of the city. BTW this ethno-term needs some kind of definition. the Italians were "silent enemies" of that monastery - I wrote something else: that monastery was a silent enemy and political opposition to all foreigners who were ruling the city. It's just a well known history of that monastery in Zadar, nothing else.Zenanarh 14:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Ethnicity irrelevant? No way!! ''All of us know that what is in a coat of arms is well studied and chosen in every detail. The choice of an Italian saint is FUNDAMENTAL, Zenanarh. In the year 1000 Zara was already under Venice control, so the Venetians (Italians) came to Zara many centuries before the 15th century. I have added a map of this "Italian reality" in the article''.--Cherso 20:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Christian saint is a Christian saint and nothing else. This saint died in 4th century, his body was brought to Jadera(Zadar) in 7th, a monastery given his name was renovated by Croats in 10th century. Earlier Dalmatia was not organized as strong military province like the others in the Byzantine Empire, more likely as a group of the communes-vasals with the main provincial administration placed in Jadera(Zadar). Byzantine Emperor was in troubles at the end of 10th, Venetian Doge Pietro Marseolo II grabbed his chance and arrived by his fleet to Dalmatia, offering his help and services to the Byzantine Emperor concerning administration of the Dalmatian cities. Venetian administrators in Jadera in Byzantine Dalmatia lasted 2 years (998-1.000) including some small troubles with Narantines, after which Orseolo went back to Venice self declaring himself as "Dux Dalmatianorum". This title was not recorded by not even one original document from Dalmatia or Byzant... Up to 15th century Italian names were found in Jadera only as merchants and passengers. Names in original documents were mostly Croatian 10th-12th and especially in 13th and 14th century. There was certain immigration of a few Venetian families to Jadera in 1234-37, after Venetian-Crusaders demolition of the city (1202). ''For Zadar population the most decisive year was 1243, when Venice conquered rebelling Zadar and they all escaped, after that Venetian government invited Venetians to inhabit Zadar offering the houses and properties of escaped Zadar citizens. So indeed a few Venetian families came to the city. But since they couldn't defend themselves from attacks of escaped citizens neither to defend the city Venetian government allowed the return of refugees in 1247. So Zadar population was again its Croatian element in large majority.'' The trace of these Venetians in the documents disappeared already in 13th century, so they were Slavized or went back to Venice. First Italian nobleman in Zadar city council and Zadar noble society was Arimondo in 16th century... Zenanarh 18:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You, Zenanarth, write in a "bizantine" style! Too many paragraphs repeating the same and "confusing" the reader, but no clear answer to the precise matter. San Grisostomo was an Italian Saint and that is why he indicates a clear connection to "italianism" in the coat of Zara. Your POV about the croat history of Zara can easily be answered with many Italian POV from many Italian books. --Cherso 20:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually this is hard core POV: San Grisostomo was an Italian Saint and that is why he indicates a clear connection to "italianism" in the coat of Zara - using that logic would make all Christians=Jews, since Jesus Christ was a Jew - no comment... Present source that San Grisostomo in 4th century was an Italian, although it really doesn't have any relevance for this discussion. From the earliest days his name in Zadar was Krševan not Grisostomo, the church and monastery were named St. Krševan! Is this "confusing" the reader? Croatian history of Zadar was written based on original documents in Zadar and Dalmatia (maybe you don't know but Dalmatian cities, especially Zadar and Dubrovnik have rich historical documentary archives saved), why relying on Italian writers since as it seems (according to contributions of Italian users here) a half of Italian historiography was heavily biased and based on... Italian poetry or what? Very sad... There is no my POV about the croat history of Zara. What we have here is an offense of Italian expansionism and shameless revisionism of Dalmatian history. Concerning Orseolo's trip to Dalmatia take a look at Brittanica... His title "Dux Dalmatianorum" is historically proved to be nothing but his act of self-declaration so science doesn't take it for serious, no need at all to discuss about it. And you are calling someone else a nationalist? Zenanarh 09:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

''You write and write and write, but it is always the same bizantine way of writing: at the end you are repeating the same things over and over, like a typical croat nationalist of the Tito era! I understand now Giovanni Giove and his complaints!! Anyway, you write that "Dalmatian cities, especially Zadar and Dubrovnik have rich historical documentary archives saved", but why ONLY the ones written by Croats? What happened with the Venetians' ones? The answer is simple'': THEY WERE DESTROYED BY SLAV NATIONALISTS SINCE THE XIX CENTURY!. ''The Croats have exterminated the Italians in Dalmatia and now they want to exterminate even their memory. The Croats destroy even the cementeries and the church registers of the Italian deaths and births, and then send a scholar to check the data about; then the expert find only data of the Croats and so the trick is done: no Italians in Dalmatia! Finally comes a croat nationalist like you or Kubura saying that the archives in Dalmatia are only showing croatian names. GOOD TRICK! But shameful and stupid in the end because the real scholars and the international communities UNDERSTAND soon or later the trick.The same trick is used even with the birthplace of Marco Polo or with the monastery of San Grisostomo or whatever. What a shame! San Grisostomo was Italian and represent the deep connection of Zara to Italy in the coat of arm -even if this reality doesn't like to the Tito followers- and you cannot cancel this fact with your bizantine "games of words" and your nationalistic POV''.--Cherso 15:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

bizantine way of writing?!? LOL have you ever tried to write a crimi novel? So you can easily use your vocabulary and imagination... Giovanni aren't you banned? Zenanarh 17:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

''I am afraid you are dreaming too much. Wake up: Tito is dead! We are in 2007 and the nationalism is dead, even in the Balkans. We cannot keep saying in our contemporary Europe what you write in a bizantine way about San Grisostomo and the Zara coat of arms. I am sure Giovanni Giove will agree with this in a few days more.''--Cherso 18:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Contemporary Dalmatian Italians
Would someone please post some kind of source for all these people? Some of them are definetly Italians, but Josip Lalić (Giuseppe Lalich) and Tonino Picula, for example, consider themselves Croatian. 80.80.56.39 01:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC) (btw, this was me DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 12:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC))


 * Adriana Grubelić - Italian??? Just because she is a director of Italian choral of Zadar? I can be a Frenchman and a director of Japanese choral, it still doesn't mean that I'm Japanese, does it? It means that I'm an artist. This section needs references... Zenanarh 21:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * This article is ordinary propagandist crap, written in order to avoid the use of adjective Croatian, and instead of creating article Italians in Croatia, we have this propagandism here.
 * Why doesn't the author writes something about the term "digić"?
 * Also, why doesn't the author of this text write about the Croats that Italianized their surnames, and renegaded from their Croat origins, and now, in order to prove them "greater Italians than Italians themselves", these renegades behave as Italian extremists, expansionists, revisionists? Yes, these are propagating regionalism at the expense of Croat national feeling in Croatia, spread anti-Croat propaganda in Italy, as well as regionalist isolationism and inter-regional hateridge in Croatia, or even worse, spread pseudoscientific works in order to extract millions of persons from Croat national corps.
 * It's hard for someone to behave as a "great Italian", when you have a surname on "-ich" or similar Croat origin surname, or a memory that his/hers ancestors had such surnames. That's why some users here on en.wiki behave that way. It's hard to admit to themselves what they really are. Kubura 11:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

''Kubura, you should moderate yourself with your offenses. You are not the only one with knowledge, while those who don't agree with your POV are all ignorants. Many Italians have surnames from other languages, as you know. Oberdan, Cavour, and many others have roots outside Italy and the same happens with France, Germany, England, etc..--Cherso 21:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I honestly tried to make an unbiased article here. I wrote an article with completely unemotional sentences and wording, with simple statements of fact wich I tried to make as neutral as possible, I even swallowed all those unverifiable censi these guys posted. Carefully choosing proper neutral wording and FIXING THESE CONSTANT SPELLING&GRAMMAR ERRORS was not at all easy I edited in good faith, only to have my work deleted (sorry, "shortened") and my sentences POV-ized to no end. You guys are really only here to vent your frustration that Dalmatia isn't in Italy, that the Venetian Republic no longer exists, and that Venice (wich has half the population of Split, btw) is slowly but inevitably sinking into its own sewers. DIREKTOR ( TALK ) 12:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Do not use a further time grammar as a pretest to revert works you don't like.
 * This is not the history of Dalmatia and/or Croatia, so do not insert unnecessary claims.Giovanni Giove 12:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * How can I know wether I like it or not WHEN I CAN'T READ IT!!?
 * Ok, so there was a need to remove some peaces of text, interesting how you removed only those you didn't like!
 * "Do not use a further time grammar as a pretest to revert works you dont like."
 * What does that even mean?, and what in god's green goodness is a "pretest"!!?

DIREKTOR ( TALK ) 12:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Contemporary Dalmatian Italians (outrageous list)
For the record the letter "ć" is the Croatian way of spelling the sound "ch". The majority of Croatian (and South Slavic) names end with that letter (mostly in this form: "...ić"). Please immediately present sources for the claims that the following people are SELF DECLARED Dalmatian Italians (where they work does not matter at all):

Renzo de' Vidovich (Vidović is an old Croatian name).

Eugenio Dalmas (AKA Eugen Dalmas).

Adriana Grubelić (Grubelić, need I say more?)

Giuseppe Lallich (AKA Josip Lalić)

DIREKTOR ( TALK ) 16:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * In Sardinia the roman "us" is cut today in "u", so Marius is said Mariu and italicus is said italicu, but in other areas of the former roman empire the cut has been different. For example in the original dalmatian language and in the "istrioto" of southern Istria the latin "cus" is cut in "c", so italicus is said italic. Of course there are other POV about, but in the science of ethimology nothing is 100% sure.Vidovich:Many Italians have foreign surnames (like the actual French president, for example). Grubelic: She has declared to be Dalmatian Italian with Croat nationality. Lallich:How? He died in the fifties. May be you met a younger relative or an omonime.--Cherso 16:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

(It turns out I met the man's relative :) All your examples are of no consequence. I don't want to enter meaningless discussions with you. Why? because we are not talking about people in general, but about specific persons. Please post sources that confirm the above persons have DECLARED THEMSELVES OF ITALIAN NATIONALITY (Italians living in Dalmatia). There is nothing to discuss here, you should have been expected to post sources for all of them, but these are the most outrageous. DIREKTOR ( TALK ) 17:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, Dalmas is the head of the Italian community in Split (if I am not mistaken) so we can actually accept him as Italian but Josip Lalić and Adriana Grubelić most definately are not Italians. Renzo de' Vidovich can also be accepted as Italian also, he is living in Italy and is even Italian nationalist (again if I am not mistaken). His surname might suggest his Croatian origins but thats all, the man considers himself Italian and I don't have nothing against that. Many Croats moved to Italy or to America with Dalmatian Italians because of fear of communists and assimilated. Thats a historical fact. --Raguseo 00:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Raguseo, do you understand that someone in Croatia with a croat surname can be Italian Dalmatian and consider himself to be Croat? My nepiew lives in Cherso, has a "croat" surname ending in "c", belongs to the local dalmatian italian association of Lussino and so considers himself A DALMATIAN ITALIAN, but has a Croat passport and identifies himself as a Croatian. He usually calls himself a Croatian with dalmatian italians ethnicity'. --Cherso (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Sources, Cherso/Giovanni. DO YOU HAVE SOURCES!!!!? DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 18:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Apparently not. We've waited three full days for any kind of response, these names will be removed pending verification. (The Lalić "ref" does not state wether or not he considers himself Italian.) 78.3.127.248 18:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Stop erasing the evidences about Lallich exile.--Cherso (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Giovanni, The "evidence" does not prove he considers himself an Italian, just read it FFS!. This is just an article about him in an Italian paper, what does it prove?! If he's not a Dalmatian Italian he does not belong on the list, therefore the source is unnecessary. The man's name is typically Slavic, FFS! there are dozens of Lallich (Lalić) surnames in Split (Spalato). DIREKTOR ( TALK ) 15:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Since the list is composed mostly of people with little encyclopedic merit or actual international fame, not to mention it is overly contentious (really, who cares??), I have removed it. The few notable and "famous" individuals are still mentioned in the text. Problem solved!!! Mariokempes (talk) 18:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * May be for you it is contentious, but not for me and others (like Giove, Brunodam, ecc..). I respect your opinion, please respect other's opinions and let the readers decide if they are important or not. For me personally nearly 1/10 of the wikipedia biography stubs should be erased (mainly about rock music bands), but I respect all of them and don't erase anyone. Cheers. --Cherso (talk) 05:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind, but I'll bet you anything you like that'll be reverted before long... DIREKTOR ( TALK ) 20:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course you don't mind. You want everything erased about we dalmatian italians in exile, do you?--Cherso (talk) 05:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Merger?
I recently came upon another article named Italian cultural and historic presence in Dalmatia (what a ridiculously long title). What exactly is the reason for two separate articles about the same thing? Shouldn't these two articles be merged? --Raguseo 22:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh noooo....not again.... Another Croat wants AGAIN a merger! Raguseo, go to the former discussions above about "cancellation" and "move" to see why was done this new article. The title was created by Direktor because the article must deal ONLY with the cultural & historical sections. And needs improvements in painting, sculpture, music,ecc..ecc..--Cherso 16:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Typical roodness. Please carefully read Wikipedia rules in order to realise the difference between moving and merging articles. DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 17:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * What means roodness? It is clear to all of us that again and again and again there it is the same tentative of SABOTAGE with the article.--Cherso 20:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest you tone a bit "Cherso" or should I just call you Giovanni? I do not want THIS article to be moved or cancelled, I am only asking what exactly is the reason that we have two articles about the same thing? Would you be kind (for a change) and tell me why? --Raguseo 23:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)