Oddly enough Francesco and Michelangelo were both awarded the title Il Divino, do you think they were called that? I am not sure how you know what FDM was called in his time. If Michelangelo was known as Michelangelo why was it not possible for FDM to be known as Francesco understanding that they both were thought of as Il Devino? Is it not possible that FDM was the most famous Francesco of his time and as such is it not possible that he too, like Michelangelo, was known by his sur name Francesco? However, regardless of what he was known as four-hundred years ago what seems to be significant today is how he is known to those of us that consider him significant.
Vance Wood. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Francesco Tribioli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'lute list'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 12:59 AM Subject: RE: HIN (Historical Informed Naming) > > are going to be unhappy. I would wager most in the Lute > > community would instantly understand that Francesco is most > > surely Francesco Canova Da Milano Da Parigi. > The point is that Francesco da Milano was never called just "Francesco" at > his times as it was for, say, Michelangelo. Perhaps it might be an > Anglophone habit to call him that way, but for sure that's not the case here > in Italy, where he's universally known with his most common name in the > Renaissance, that is Francesco da Milano. No one here would call him with > just the first name and this is why the use to call him just Francesco > disturbs me. Perhaps, as he was an Italian, the Italian habit should prevale > this time... 8^) > > Francesco (da Firenze) > > >
