Talk:Franciscus Patricius/Archive 1

Nationality
He was Italian for culture and birth--Giovanni Giove 13:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No he wasn't. The man was Venetian (Republic of Venice) by birth.
 * Indeed, an Italian state. --Giovanni Giove 14:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Which included Slovenes, Croats, Greeks, Albanians...yeah right. Even Venetian as Italian is rather doubtful. --Factanista 14:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not in Cherso. I always wrot in Italian.--Giovanni Giove 14:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Everywhere in the Republic. Dalmatian islands and whole of coastal Dalmatia(especially cities) had mixed Italic and Slavic population, the Slavs who were in service with the Venetian Republic often "latinized" their names and signed themselves in Latin. Such was the case in Republic of Ragusa. Italic languages (Dalmatian, Venetian, Latin) were the languages of the elite. --Factanista 14:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nationalistic claims! There were different languages (and not non-existing nationalities). In Cherso the usage of Italian and Dalmatian is well documented. It is not true it was used just by elites.--Giovanni Giove 14:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Again you with that pamphlet claim...what exactly is nationalistic in my statements of the blatant facts? What? --Factanista 14:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Table on church of Saint Onofrio
Today (Februry 7th 2008) was small ceremony of puting the table on church of Saint Onofrio in Rome (where is Petrić's tomb), and interesting thing is that on table on church in italian capital Rome, Petrić is not of Italian, but of Croatian origin. SpeedyGonsales (talk) 19:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Radio Vatican, in Croatian. Feb 8, 2008. Interview with embassador Marin and academician Moguš. "In the church of Saint Onofrio on the Roman hill Gianicolo, in Thursday, Feb 7, a memorial plaque was revealed. Memorial plaque is made in honor of great Croatian philosopher Franje Petriš, on the 411th anniversary of his death. About the iniciative, its realization, as well as about personality of that Croatian great person, we've talked with Croatian embassador in Vatican, Emilio Marin, and with president of HAZU (Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts), Milan Moguš.". Feb 7, 2008. News In the church of Saint Onofrio a memorial plaque dedicated to Franjo Petrić. "On this day, Feb 7, 1597, in Rome died Franjo Petrić, one of greatest Croatian philosophers, born on Apr 25, 1529 in Cres. He was buried in the Roman church of St. Onotrio. Today afternoon, cardinal Giovanni Lajolo (President of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State and President of the Governorate of Vatican City State), together with prof. Milan Moguš (president of HAZU) has revealed the memorial plaque in honor of that great thinker. ...".. Here're the news from Croatian national TV, it contained the link to videostream from that news (this is cached version, newly organized site of hrt.hr makes no links to old news???). Petrić (a.k.a. as Patricius and Petriš, now has it's memorial plaque on the church, that already has memorial plaques dedicated to Torquato Tasso, Francois Chateaubriand and Johann Wolfgang Goethe. IKA Bulletin: U Rimu otkrivena spomen ploča Franji Petriću. (IKA=Informativna katolička agencija, Catholic Press Agency) "...Prema riječima kardinala Lajola, ovo odavanje priznanja Petriću potvrđuje punopravnu pripadnost hrvatskog naroda duhu europskog jedinstva..." (translation: As cardinal Lajolo said, this recognition of Petrić's work confirms full belonging of Croats to the spirit of European unity''"). Kubura (talk) 07:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

More from Vatican, now in Italian. Speaking about "presenza croata nell' Urbe". and second page (veneto-croato) "Il ricordo, qui, oggi, di Francesco Patrizi, veneto-croato-italiano in questo contesto spirituale ed europeo, ha anch’esso il significato di una testimonianza – modesta certo, ma non destituita di significato -  dell’appartenenza pleno iure della nazione croata a tale unità dello spirito europeo ...'').  Kubura (talk) 09:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Croatian name
The Croatian name has appeared for the first time in the 1950s. It has no historycal background.--Giovanni Giove 13:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The Italian name is then also without historical background as he signed himself aways with his Latin name. --Factanista 14:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * False. Several Italian operas are reported. All with an Italian signature--Giovanni Giove 14:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Original Italian Opera by Aldine Press.
 * This looks like transliteration not like anything similar to an original signature. As I said he signed himself strictly in Latin. --Factanista 14:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's the proof the name Patrizi is original. Latin names were only nicknames.--Giovanni Giove 14:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No it's not proof. What you showed here is not a signature. --Factanista 14:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Here another one Original opera by Francesco Patrizi. --Giovanni Giove 14:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)--Giovanni Giove 14:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Again thats not a signature, it's a poster. --Factanista 14:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit war
It is sad to see that User:Factanista has started an further edit war to imposte his nationalistic POV. --Giovanni Giove 14:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It is you who is edit-warring and imposing your POV on various articles. --Factanista 14:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to report the behaviour of User:Factanista to an administrator--Giovanni Giove 14:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please do, you will be reported shortly yourself. --Factanista 14:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Done! Your behaviour needs no comment!--Giovanni Giove 14:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * My behavior? 1. You didn't even bother to explain your changes and claims to what exactly is "Croatian nationalistic POV" in my edits 2. you started two massive edit-wars and have broken 3RR extensively and for that I will report you. --Factanista 14:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I STOP FOR NOW. I hope you will be punished for what you have done!--Giovanni Giove 14:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Likewise. --Factanista 14:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The Croaticity of 'Frane Petric': a nationalistic lye
Quote from:  Quaderni Giuliani di Storia   Anno XXIII  (n°1 gennaio-giugno 2002)  pag.21-35 LA LETTERATURA ITALIANA IN DALMAZIA: UNA STORIA FALSIFICATA ''Quando non si riesce a falsificare il cognome, si falsifica almeno il nome e allora il pittore fiumano dell'Ottocento Giovanni Simonetti diventa Ivan Simonetti; sempre a Fiume l'illustre medico Giorgio Catti diventa Djuro Catti, Gio­vanni Luppis si trasforma in Ivan Lupis o addirittura Vukic e si potrebbe conti­nuare a lungo. Quasi sempre, però, si segue la regola della contraffazione totale, di nome e cognome, in modo da cancellare ogni traccia di italianità. Allora capi­ta che il grande filosofo e poeta rinascimentale italiano Francesco Patrizio da Cherso ( 1529-1597) venga via via trasformato dalla storiografia croata in Frane Patricije-Petric nel 1927 (M. Dvomicic) e in Franjo Petric nel 1929 (F. Jelacic); resta Francesco Patrizzi per I. Kamalic, nel 1934, ma viene scritto Franje Patricijo da Nikola Zic nello stesso anno; poi è Franjo Petric-Franciscus Patricius per Ivan Esih nel 1936 e Franjo Petris per S. Juric nel 1956 e Franciskus Patri-cijus per V. Premec nel 1968; per altri ancora il cognome si trasforma in Petric, Petrisió e Petrìcevic, infine il cosiddetto «padre della filosofia creata» è diventa­to stabilmente Frane Petric dopo che così lo chiamarono V. Filipovic e Zvane Crnja nel 1980. In suo onore vengono tenute le «Giornate di Frane Petric» a Cherso, le giornate di un uomo inesistente. Non si può onorare un uomo togliendogli nome e cognome, falsificandoli. Se Francesco Patrizio potesse sorgere dalla sua tomba, maledirebbe i suoi falsi­ficatori e tutti coloro che hanno affollato la storia della cultura e dell'arte croata con personaggi che nulla o pochissimo hanno che fare con la cultura croata. A me dispiace moltissimo - e qui mi soffermo ancora un poco su Francesco Patri­zio - che i chersini non si siano ancora ribellati alla sopraffazione, accettando per esempio che venisse imposto alla locale scuola elementare il nome di «Fra­ne Petric». Ci tengo a ripetere e sottolineare - visto che ogni uomo, di oggi e di ieri, è quello che è per la sua lingua, la sua cultura - che Francesco Patrizio non scrisse in vita sua una sola riga in croato. La Città Felice, il Dialogo dell'honore, il Discorso della diversità dei furori poetici, la Lettura sopra del Petrarca, La gola e il sonno e l’ oziose piume, il poemetto Eridano, i trattati Della historia dieci dialoghi, Della retorica dieci dialoghi, La militia romana di Polibio, di Ti­to Livio e Dionigi Alicarnasso, II Trimerone, Della Poetica, La Deca Disputata, La Deca Istoriale ed altre opere del grande chersino che oggi i croati sono co­stretti a tradurre nella loro lingua per gloriarsi della «grandezza della filosofia croata» furono scritte tutte in italiano da un italiano! E sul frontespizio di quelle opere l'autore si firmò come Francesco Patrizio, talvolta come Patrizzi e Patrizi, come nei saggi polemici intitolati Difesa di Francesco Patrizi dalle cento accu­se dategli dal signor Iacopo Mazzoni; Risposta di Francesco Patrizi a due op­posizioni fattegli dal Sig. Giacomo Mazzoni e Paralleli militari di Francesco Patrizi. Il nostro filosofo e poeta pubblicò complessivamente venticinque opere, quasi tutte edite a Venezia, e di esse cinque furono scritte in lingua latina, tutte le altre in italiano. Come già visto, alcune di queste opere portano il nome e co­gnome dell'autore nello stesso titolo, come Le rime di Messer Luca Contile, con discorsi et argomenti di Messer Francesco Patritio. Insomma, Patrizio ov­vero Patritius come si firmava in latino, non fu mai Frane Petric, tanto meno Pe­tris, Petriòevic o come diavolo vogliono i suoi contraffattori. Non si tratta qui di grafia, ma di rispettare semplicemente la verità storica. Perché allora – chiederà qualcuno - gli storici croati si accaniscono tanto a enfatizzare il Nostro? Su quale fondamento basano le loro asserzioni? Ecco, ricorrono a una leggenda. Il critico letterario croato Franjo Zenko così scrisse nel 1980 nella prefazione alla traduzione croata dell'opera di Patrizio Della Historia dieci dialoghi: «Sull'ori­gine del filosofo chersino per ora non si può dire nulla con certezza. L'accenno fatto dallo stesso filosofo nella sua autobiografia, laddove si dice che i suoi an­tenati vennero dalla Bosnia come discendenti di famiglia reale, non si può ac­cettare come degno di fede; e finora non si sono trovati documenti che attestino da quale località o regione giunsero a Cherso». E tuttavia, è bastata l'accenno di Patrizio alla leggenda familiare secondo la quale i Patrizio fossero discenden­ti di una famiglia reale bosniaca, per indurre quasi tutti gli intellettuali croati, fi­no agli organizzatori della «Giornate di Frano Petric» ad affermare, ripetere, scrivere e scolpire sul marmo la croaticità di Francesco Patrizio. È la dimostra­zione, questa, della pochezza morale e intellettuale dei falsificatori. E qui, pri­ma di continuare con altri esempi di falsificazioni, voglio subito dire un mio pensiero in merito. La contraffazione della storia e l'appropriazione indebita da parte croata dei grandi uomini e delle grandi opere della cultura italiana di que­ste terre - Istria, Dalmazia, Quarnero - è una vecchia-nuova forma di nazionali­smo e sciovinismo. La frustrazione derivante da un senso di minor valore e le insufficienze culturali vengono trasformate in miti di vittoria, dietro i quali si nascondono l'invidia e l'odio. In questo caso l'odio per l'Italia e gli italiani. Succede come è successo alcuni anni addietro in certe regioni martoriate dalla guerra. Per fare pulizia etnica o si ammazzavano le persone di diversa etnia op­pure queste venivano terrorizzate e costrette a scappare; ma anche dopo la fuga restavano le loro case chiese o moschee a testimonianza della presenza secolare nel territorio di quella etnìa; a questo punto si distruggevano quelle case e tem­pli con il fuoco e con la dinamite. Anticamente, quando il cristianesimo preval­se sul paganesimo, le chiese vennero tutte costruite sui ruderi dei tempi pagani per cancellare le tracce delle divintà greco-romane ed affermare l'unica vera re­ligione; ma si è ottenuto il risultato contrario: le antiche fondamenta pagane so­no rimaste, si sono meglio conservate. Agli antichi Avari e Slavi che distrassero Epidaurus ovvero Ragusavecchia, Salona, Nona ed altre città romane dalmate si può perdonare: erano barbari, pagani e analfabeti. Ma come si possono perdo­nare i nuovi barbari dell'epoca nostra? Le offese portate al filosofo chersino, al musicista e poeta di Montona, al pittore fiumano e a tanti altri esponenti della cultura e dell'arte italiana nella regione istro-quarnerina ovvero nei tenitori che nel 1945 furono dichiarati «neoliberati» sono la conseguenza di uno sforzo compiuto dai nuovi venuti per azzerare la storia di chi li ha preceduti e di riscri­vere una storia nuova ad essi più conveniente; ma poiché in questi territori gli italiani, anche se pochi, sono rimasti, la distruzione della memoria non ha potu­to essere totale. Invece in Dalmazia non si salva nessuno. A leggere i libri di storia e le storie della letteratura o dell'arte croati si ha l'impressione che quella regione sia culturalmente croata almeno da tremila an­ni, a cominciare dagli illiri: romani e veneziani furono soltanto dei temporanei invasori, ospiti senza radici e senza potere, senza lingua, senza scrittura e senza cultura. Mentre i contadini e popolani croati creavano opere scultoree e pittori-che eccezionali fin dall'ottavo secolo, e scrivevano libri di poesia, trattati di filo­sofia, opere scientifiche eccetera, patrizi e cittadini romanici e italici della città costiere della Dalmazia e delle sue isole maggiori facevano la parte di inetti spettatori, oppure offrivano la manovalanza, ignoranti e analfabeti com'erano.''--Giovanni Giove 10:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * 1 this is English wikipedia, please post in English #2 There is no issue of "croaticity" of Franciscus Patricius #3 stop enforcing your POV. --Factanista 17:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Gross summary. The author, an Italian, protests against Croatian historian who deformate history in a nationalistic way by attributing to their country things from Italian culture. Exactly was Factanista seems to be doing here. In the specific case, it proves that Patrizi was first "Croatized" by Croatian historians in 1927 by changing his name. All his works, but for five in Latin, were written in Italian. I think we should put aside nationalism (I always read that Croatian were fervidly nationalistic, I've finally had a proof, it seems...), if we're intelligent people, try to look at the argument with rationality. --Attilios 20:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually stating that Croatian historians are claiming something Italian is flawed, fallacious and offensive. Even more so stating that I do so. There are couple of facts regarding this article: 1. Patrizi was born in Venetian Dalmatian in Republic of Venice in 16th century, at that time there was no Italy 2. The fact his name has been "croatized" as you would state or as I would state that he is simply known in Croatia under that name doesn't mean he himself is Croatized. Also claiming Croats are "fervidly nationalistic" is rather rude generalization. Btw. as you can notice I am part Italian myself, I have roots from northern Italy, Padova to be more specific. --Factanista 00:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear Attilio, the author is not Italian, but.... Croat! Giacomo Scotti was born in Naples. He was so communist that when he was 17 he left his city to join partisan formations. He was so communist that after the war he has moved to Jugoslavia to live in paradise of ploretariate. He has never neglected his past and his great admiration for Tito... He still live in Croatia, so, he's not an Italian natinalist... let's say so. --Giovanni Giove 21:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Giacomo Scotti is Italian, the fact he moved to Yugoslavia and today lives in Croatia doesn't mean he all of a sudden became a Croat. --Factanista 00:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

You guys are ridiculous. You can't assign nationality to somebody who lived 500 years ago based on current day maps and borders. At the time when Patricius was born and living in Cres/Cherso, that part of the Adriatic was under control of the Venetian Republic, while the rest of modern-day Croatia was ruled by Kingdom of Croatia (which existed within the Habsburg Monarchy). Therefore, Patricius' citizenship would've certainly been Venetian at the time. His nationality, on the other hand, would've been determined either by Patricius himself or his family. The languages he spoke were likely to be Venetian, Latin, possibly Dalmatian (a Romance language similar to Venetian), and Croatian of Čakavian dialect. He most likely would've identified himself as Venetian or Slav/Croat, depending on which of his spoken languages he associated with home, family, etc. --anonymous 04:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.211.205 (talk)

Name of Cres
Quote from [] page; "Please, keep in mind that, per WP:NC, for the purposes of naming this article the names used for this artist by Latin, Italian, Croatian or Chinese-speaking individuals and authors (of the past, present and future) are irrelevant. Instead, we should consider only the names commonly used in English-language" Cres is known in English language as Cres, not Cherso:) And that is also its historical name (on Croatian language). Ceha 18:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Adriatic culture is not just Italian
West Adriatic coast belongs to Italy. East Adriatic coast belongs to Croatia, Slovenia, Albania, Montengro. And to the cultures of those countries. Italian esulis and irredentists - BACK OFF. We do not need anything from the West.

Barbarians were always coming from West and North.

Go and listen to your buddy Fini! That is the best you can do. We do not need somebody coming saying us that only thing that has value here are real estate.

Giacomo Scotti claims
I will translate the last part of the quoted text:

La frustrazione derivante da un senso di minor valore e le insufficienze culturali vengono trasformate in miti di vittoria, dietro i quali si nascondono l'invidia e l'odio. In questo caso l'odio per l'Italia e gli italiani. Succede come è successo alcuni anni addietro in certe regioni martoriate dalla guerra. Per fare pulizia etnica o si ammazzavano le persone di diversa etnia op­pure queste venivano terrorizzate e costrette a scappare; ma anche dopo la fuga restavano le loro case chiese o moschee a testimonianza della presenza secolare nel territorio di quella etnìa; a questo punto si distruggevano quelle case e tem­pli con il fuoco e con la dinamite. Anticamente, quando il cristianesimo preval­se sul paganesimo, le chiese vennero tutte costruite sui ruderi dei tempi pagani per cancellare le tracce delle divintà greco-romane ed affermare l'unica vera re­ligione; ma si è ottenuto il risultato contrario: le antiche fondamenta pagane so­no rimaste, si sono meglio conservate. Agli antichi Avari e Slavi che distrassero Epidaurus ovvero Ragusavecchia, Salona, Nona ed altre città romane dalmate si può perdonare: erano barbari, pagani e analfabeti. Ma come si possono perdo­nare i nuovi barbari dell'epoca nostra? Le offese portate al filosofo chersino, al musicista e poeta di Montona, al pittore fiumano e a tanti altri esponenti della cultura e dell'arte italiana nella regione istro-quarnerina ovvero nei tenitori che nel 1945 furono dichiarati «neoliberati» sono la conseguenza di uno sforzo compiuto dai nuovi venuti per azzerare la storia di chi li ha preceduti e di riscri­vere una storia nuova ad essi più conveniente; ma poiché in questi territori gli italiani, anche se pochi, sono rimasti, la distruzione della memoria non ha potu­to essere totale. Invece in Dalmazia non si salva nessuno. A leggere i libri di storia e le storie della letteratura o dell'arte croati si ha l'impressione che quella regione sia culturalmente croata almeno da tremila an­ni, a cominciare dagli illiri: romani e veneziani furono soltanto dei temporanei invasori, ospiti senza radici e senza potere, senza lingua, senza scrittura e senza cultura. Mentre i contadini e popolani croati creavano opere scultoree e pittori-che eccezionali fin dall'ottavo secolo, e scrivevano libri di poesia, trattati di filo­sofia, opere scientifiche eccetera, patrizi e cittadini romanici e italici della città costiere della Dalmazia e delle sue isole maggiori facevano la parte di inetti spettatori, oppure offrivano la manovalanza, ignoranti e analfabeti com'erano

''The frustration deriving from a sense of minor value and the cultural insufficiencies come transformed in myths of Victory, behind which they hide envies it and hatred. In this case hatred for Italy and the Italians. It succeeds as it has succeeded some years ago in sure regions martoriate from the war. In order to make purity ethnic or the persons of various etnic op­pure committed suicide these came terrorized and forced to escape; but also after the escape their houses remained churches or mosques to testimony of the secular presence in the territory of that one etnic group; to this point those houses and tem­ples with the fire and the dynamite were destroyed. Anciently, when the Christianity preval­se on the aganism, the churches came all constructed on the remainings of the pagan times in order to cancel the greek-roman traces of the divinity and to assert the only true re­ligion; but the contrary result has been obtained: the ancient foundations pay some so­no remained, are best conserved. To the antichi Misers and Slavs who distroyed Epidaurus that is Ragusavecchia, Salona, Ninth and other roman cities Dalmatians can be pardoned: they were Barbarian, pagani and illiterate. But as the new Barbarians of the age can themselves be forgiven ours? The offenses capacities to the philosopher from Cres, to the musician and poet of Motovun to the painter from Rijeka and many others exponents of the culture and the Italian art in the region istra-quarnerthat is the tenitori that in the 1945 were declare to you "neoliberati" are the consequence of a effort completed from the new ones come in order to annul the history of who have preceded them and of riscri­vere one new history to they more convenient; but since in these territories the Italians, even if little, are remained, the destruction of the memory do not have potu­to to be total. Instead in Dalmatia nobody is not saved. To read to the history books and history of the Croatian literature or the art the impression is had that that region is culturally Croatian at least from shakes it an­ni, to begin from the illiri: Roman and veneziani were only of the temporary invaders, hosts without roots and being able, language, writing and culture. While the Croatian peasants and popolani created scultoree works and painter-that exceptional since the eighth century, and wrote poetry books, deals you of filo­sofia, scientific works patrizi and city etc, Romanesque and italici of the coastal city of the Dalmatia and its greater islands made the part of inept spectators, or offered the manovalanza, ignoring and illiterate com' they were

--Anto 20:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Petrić's autobiography
I recently learned that Petrić wrote extensive autobiography reflecting on his life. It could contain valuable documents and solve problems about his "nationality", so it would be great if someone can find it. I must say that it's very suspicious that someone who retired to Croatian (then "Illyrian") College of St. Jerome (founded for clerics from "Illyria", i. e. Slavs from Eastern Adriatic) would consider himself Italian.

A. Solerti "Autobiografia dell' Patrizi", "Archivio storico per Trieste, l'Istria e il Trentino", vol. III, nbr. 3-4, 1886. N. Žic, "Autobiografija Franje Patricija", Napredak br. XI - XII, 1934.

It's interesting that even Benedetto Croce wrote on Petrić. Philosopher12 (talk) 14:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Ending the Debate on Franciscus Patricius' Ethnicity and Name
The edit war in this article/talk is frustrating to read because both editors, Giovanni Giove and Factanista, seem to rely heavily on emotions and ignore elementary historical facts that have been established by legions of scholars who have researched and studied Patricius’ life. As one anonymous editor pointed out, it’s ridiculous to try to assign modern ethnic identities to people who lived 500 years ago in completely different cultural and political contexts. To claim that Francisco Patricius was purely Italian or Croatian is about as ludicrous as claiming that Julius Caesar was Italian or Emperor Diocletian was Croatian. The closest we can really come to the truth would be to say that Franciscus Patricius, aka Francesco Patrizi, aka Franjo Petriš, was a Venetian-Croatian scholar.

In order to shed more light on the complexity of Patricius’ ethnicity, we must consider the history of Cres prior to and leading up to Patricius’ life:

Cres in antiquity was inhabited primarily by Illyrian and Liburnian tribes. In 177 BC Cres came under Roman rule and its population, as was common in the Roman Empire, soon began mixing with its Roman conquerors. Roman rule ended in 476 AD with the fall of Rome. At that time the population of Cres would’ve been almost entirely Roman with traces of Illyrian culture. After the fall of Rome the island of Cres came under Byzantine rule. The ethnic composition of its population during this time would’ve likely remained the same, until the 7th century when Slavic tribes – namely Croats – began migrating to Cres from the Balkan mainland. By the 10th century and the formation of the Croatian kingdom, Cres was firmly under Croatian rule, as evidenced by the formation of many towns with Croatian names, establishment of noble families with Croatian names, and documents such as the 11th century Valun Tablet written in Croatian Glagolitic script.

Venetian influence on Cres, coinciding with the rise and expansion of the Venetian Republic in the Adriatic Sea, began in the 11th century. What followed was a period of several centuries where Cres constantly changed hands between the Venetian Republic, the Byzantine Empire, the Kingdom of Croatia, and later the Kingdom of Croatia and Hungary. This period of political instability finally ended in 1409 when Cres came firmly under the rule of the Venetian Republic and remained there until 1797 (the fall of the Venetian Republic). The noble families in Cres at the time, much like noble families anywhere, were less concerned with questions of ethnic identity and more with keeping their lands and money. Therefore even noble families of Cres that might’ve self-identified as Croatian (or Slavic or Illyrian) at the time Cres came under Venetian rule would’ve been politically motivated to accept their new overlords and adopt Venetian names, language and customs. This wasn’t so much a question of changing one’s ethnic identify as much as a matter of political pragmatism. Cres census records from the early 1400s show that the Petris/Petriš/Petrišević family was already living in Cres at the time, and had family members with very distinctly Croatian names such as Dragonja, Stana, Petrica, Dobriša, etc. Whether they considered themselves ethnically Croatian or not is irrelevant – what’s more likely is that, much like the rest of Cres’ population, they spoke Chakavian Croatian and officially adopted the names and customs of whichever state was in power. So the Croatian-sounding Petriš/Petrišević eventually became Venetian-sounding Petris/Petrisio, to go along with the political tide of the times.

At the time Franciscus Patricius lived and worked in Cres, the Croatian language (Chakavian dialect) would’ve been primarily used by the bourgeoisie – fishermen, peasants, merchants, etc. The ruling elite, among which was the Petris family, would’ve primarily relied on the Venetian language as their lingua franca. Venetian was the language of administration and business, Dante’s Tuscan dialect (the predecessor of modern Italian) was the language of poetry and literature, and Latin was the language of religion, science and philosophy. It is therefore not surprising that all Patricius’ works were written in Italian and Latin, for which he also used different variations of his name (Francesco Patrizi and Franciscus Patricius, repectively). Both literary forms of his name were derived from his official family name Petris/Petrisio (which was the name used in Cres census records), but more importantly were specifically chosen to indicate his patrician origins. The fact that Patricius never published a single work in Croatian should come as no surprise. To do so in 16th century Venice would’ve been the equivalent of publishing a contemporary doctoral thesis in street slang or IM acronyms – highly unorthodox.

As for Patricius’ own ethnic self-identification, his own autobiography claims that his ancestors came from Bosnia (which at the time was considered part of Illyricum, along with Civil Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia). Towards the end of his life, when he lived in Rome, he applied for membership to the Croat Fraternity of St. Jerome. In order to qualify for the said fraternity applicants had to demonstrate proof they were born in one of four Illyrian provinces, spoke Croatian, and were persons of high moral character. He was accepted into St. Jerome’s on October 13th, 1596, as “vivae vocis oraculo”. He died the following year, 1597.

In summary, it could be said with high confidence that Franciscus Patricius, aka Frane Petriš, was a philosopher and scientist with ties to both Venetian and Croatian cultures. The least controversial association would be to call him a Venetian Croatian scholar.

P.S. Giovanni Giove was actually right about one thing – the name Frane Petrić, currently preferred by Croatian writers, has no basis in history. Historical records only show evidence of Petriš and Petrišević being in use on the islands of Cres and Krk. The Petrić variation was introduced in 1979 when his works were first translated to Croatian, and unfortunately it stuck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.0.116.105 (talk) 09:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)