Talk:Lombard banking

Contradictions
This article contradicts itself. Near the beginning it claims that Lombards were not trusted, and a few paragraphs down it claims that they were. Cjwilks 12:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

The term was sometimes used in a derogatory sense as townspeople often accused lombards of usury. The lombards were never very popular for this reason and often had trouble with local governments.

"This Italian 'Lombard' pawn shop method became famous and had a name for reliability and honesty."


 * Okay then I will add a template to the top of the page. The sunder king 12:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Collapse of lombard banking around 1340 ?
The section about the 14th century and the collapse of parts of the banking system certainly opens more questions than it answers. It could very well be expanded with some actual, material content and not only a few external references, which despite being very entertaining and thought-provoking may be a little afflicted with bias and/or coming from sources with a less than perfect renown for scientific integrity. It may be bad Google-fu on my behalf, but the Great Indexer does not seem to display any prominent sources that are clearly free from suspicion to be spinoffs of the initial LaRouche/Schiller Institute articles. What does actual economic history research have to say about the issue? It is indeed very interesting. Rootmoose (talk) 00:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * How is it possible that Jesuits were involved with money lending in the Middle Age, if the Company of Jesus was not established until 1540? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.163.84.144 (talk) 16:06, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Inaccurate Claim
Lombard Street in San Francisco was apparently not named so because it had any history of financiers, bankers, etc. It was merely named after a street in Philadelphia. See https://www.sftravel.com/things-to-do/attractions/iconic-sf/lombard-street. This claim should be removed from the article. Rhythm Droid (talk) 20:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)