Talk:Ciompi Revolt

grasso vs grosso

This article speaks of popolo grasso (the well-to-do "fat ones"). I'm currently reading Jan Dumolyn & Jelle Haemers, ‘Patterns of urban rebellion in medieval Flanders’, Journal of Medieval History 31 (2005) 369-393. They speak of "popolo grosso". While reading that article I found grasso more fitting myself since it concerned patricians. But it seems that both grosso and grasso are correct. Should we put it in the article? 81.68.255.36 (talk) 14:56, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

copy edits

Overall formidable article, but I tried to reduce redundancy, sharpen language, and eliminate some dangling modifiers. The comment of historiography of the events repeated over three times in text.Rococo1700 (talk) 03:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

historiography

"Today, historians hold a quite objective and analytical point of view toward the Ciompi Revolt, comparing to their predecessors. They view the conflict as a lens reflecting the issues of Florentine society in the late 14th century, and also as a catalyst for Florence’s autocratic rule.[66] Moreover, to them, the rebellion is a lens that reflects history as an ever changing entity, as historians living in different times have different “presents,” and one’s present dictates how one views the past.[67]"=

This strikes me as wholly fatuous. What historian is not "analytical", and if the last sentence is true, what do we make of the claim that today's historians are more "objective" than their predecessors? I Also hard to imagine that any account would ever disagree that the conflict "reflect[ed] the issues of Florentine society in the late 14th century", in which case this is not worth mentioning.

Needs deleting or replacing with actual refs to new or important research — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidbroder1988 (talk • contribs) 04:05, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

When did the revolt end? 1378 or 1382?

The article appears to contradict itself. In several places, including the lead sentence, it is stated that the revolt lasted from 1378 to 1382. However when describing the phases of the revolt it is said that the Ciompi guilds were dissolved on September 1, 1378. There is also no mention anywhere in the article of events taking place later than October 1378. Either some parts of the article are wrong, or key information to explain this three year gap is missing. 74.109.244.45 (talk) 15:05, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@74.109.244.45 Additionaly to your concern, ther e is definitly an misunderstanding of the literature or their sources, because the text contradicts itself.

It says: "After the final clash with the radicals, the Signory retook office at the end of Michele di Lando's term. This regime did not last long, it was overthrown again in 1382 and di Lando was sent into exile as a collaborator with the Signory." But in the following passage it says: "The city of Florence was governed by the Ciompi until 1382..."

There seemed to be several writers who were just writing their thing, as one can also recognize in the abundance of redundancies, that make up a long text, that could be cut in half. (But this has to be done by someone knowledgable about the subject and has the sources at hand.) MenkinAlRire 18:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)