![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
In the end, could we at least agree on his birthdate? -- PaxEquilibrium 14:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Seeing how certain memebers (not to use some other word) are prone to fabrication to prove their nationalist views I would like to propose a compromise. This would mean removal of all association to various ethnic groups, in other words removal of the categories proclaiming him an Italian, Croatian (and/or Serbian) mathematician, philosopher, etc. This was already done at the Nicolaus Copernicus article due to similar dispute. The ethnicity issue would remain part of the article (with some rewriting) and this would hopefully prevent further revert-wars. This is something I am not doing lightly as there is absolutly no proof that the man had any connection with Serbia or Serb, but to show good will towards resolving this issue and to prevent such similar idiotic disputes in future I am willing to bend it. What say you? Tar-Elenion 11:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Your edit warring:
# 14:26, 25 February 2007 (hist) (diff) List of Serbs (rm, these people are not Serbs) # 14:25, 25 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Slavica Ecclestone (rv) # 14:15, 25 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Talk:Roger Joseph Boscovich # 14:11, 25 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Roger Joseph Boscovich (rv, provide source) # 21:37, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Talk:Roger Joseph Boscovich # 21:31, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Requests for page protection # 21:23, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Talk:Roger Joseph Boscovich (→Controversies, endless disputes) # 21:21, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Roger Joseph Boscovich (rv, this is not a compromise, please provide the evidence that he had any connection with Serbia) # 21:10, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Talk:Roger Joseph Boscovich (→Controversies, endless disputes) # 21:07, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Roger Joseph Boscovich (rv) # 21:07, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Slavica Ecclestone (rv) # 21:07, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Medieval Croatian state (rv) # 22:06, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) History of Croatia (rv) # 22:06, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) House of Boshko (rv, nikola boskovic now has his own article) (top) # 19:37, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Medieval Croatian state (rv, no they're not, there are appropriate articles dealing with the history of serbs) # 19:36, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Kingdom of Croatia (rv, no she's not) # 19:35, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) History of Croatia (rv, this is not established truth) # 19:34, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Slavica Ecclestone (rv, because you are challenging the current established version, discuss at talk page in future) # 17:09, 24 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Slavica Ecclestone (rv, it is you who has the burden of proof)
My providing of source (and your lying): [2]. Nikola 19:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Let's start from the beginning. Could you please write down your proposed rewrite of the "Nationality controversy" section or at least outline how would that rewrite look like, and could you please tell why do you think that the book isn't verifiable, or quote someone else telling so? Nikola 10:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
The nationality of Boscovic, in my point of view, is a Ragusan/Dalmatian, because, he born in the Republic of Ragusa, free state, the etnic of the population is a mix of many people, the mother of Ruder Boscovix was a italian (modern concept) Paula Bettera, the father Nicola, was a herzegovina etnic (dalmatian), Dalmatia until 1918 was a different region with Croatia, Yugoeslavia in this moment, the term in my point of view is said "Ragusan/Dalmatian", Boscovic never know about the Croatia State, Servia State, Montenegro State, Italia, etc. in Europe, in every state exist a lot of different people, dialects, folks, for example in the north of Italy, Tirol, most of the 50% spoke german, in Germany in Bavaria (Bayern), spoke the dialect Bayern, in the north the prussian german, speak others dialects, etc. historical revival between the prussian and the bayerns, and Austria. Ragusino
Nikola Smolenski, you're talking to a community-banned user. :D -- PaxEquilibrium 12:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I've found a massive revert by user:DIREKTOR, of several correct edits, such us the proper infobox. I can understand, there is something wrong, but there is no need to destroy all my work. I ask to DIREKTOR to list the disputed arguments, and to limit his edits to the controversial points. Possibly in in good faith. Regards. Giovanni Giove 09:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Disputed claims
-- Giovanni Giove 09:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Milan (
Duchy of Milan). Which 2000 years old Italy? Roman province before 476, or few city states after that till 1861? Milan isn't even on the Apenine peninsula.
Venetian of that time is much closer to Spanish than today's Italian (same goes for majority of cisalpine dialects of roman language continum:). Giovanni, you have stated in your profile that you speak Itallian, Spanish and French. You should have known this.
Also, there is no south slavic, the name of the language to which you are refering is Croatian.
Ceha
12:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
And italic is more appropriate. It doesn't have any conections to the state which was created in second half of the 19th century in the Apenine peninsula.
Ceha
12:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
No it is not. Was there at the time of Boscovich death a state named Italy? No. Where did he died? In duchy of Milan. Was that duchy part of some other state? No it was not. Where is the problem and what is the purpose of Italy in that sentence?:) Is there some other duchy of Milan outside of today's Italy whith we could confuse it with?:) Ceha 13:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Look, just try to answer simple question. What is the use of putting it side by side with a name of historical state (duchy of Milan) in which Boscovich died? Ceha 14:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Last question is what it matters. Because there is no need of putting Italy side by side Duchy of Milan. What did you wanted to ask me? Ceha 14:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, Giovanni stop playing dumb. You didn't ask me that. There is a already a name of historical state in which Boscovics died. I don't see why something more is necesary. Ceha 14:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
So basicly what are you saying that under naming conventions Milan in the 18th century was not in the duchy of Milan than in Italy (which did not existed as state)? And that Milan was last 2000 years in eternal Italy no matter how the state in which was in was called? That is hevy POV... Please be clear about that. Naming conventions states that we should put the name of historical state at that time. Or no?:) Ceha 15:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Giovanni I have already answered your questions on your discussion page. Here it is again:
1. If you wish to make a point that you are talking about Italy/Apenine peninsula then you should have put a wikilink to Italy - geographic region not a wikilink pointing to an article about modern Republic of Italy. There was no Italy (republic) at the time of Boscovich's life and at the moment of his death.
2. Ragusa is a historical name for Dubrovnik, nobody is saying otherwise, it is also mentioned in this article. But this article is not about Dubrovnik's history, this article is about a person. Today in English language the city is known as Dubrovnik and we should use the name that is used in English and known to everyone.
3. Italian was not used in his time, it was Ragusan dialect of extinct Dalmatian language. Italic is more appropriate because it points out the Romanic/Italic character of the culture. Italian is a modern term 99% of the time applied to modern state of Italy which as all know didn't exist until 1861 and Garibaldi. Also Chakavian is exclusively Croatian dialect. --
Raguseo
21:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
You can not threthen me. As for answers, part of them was also on [
[3]] your talk page, but I'll sum it up again.
1.If Ragusan republic(political entity) is his birth place then Duchy of Milan (also political entity) is his death place. But, I agree with Raguseo. If you want to speak about geographical region and not a state, put a wikilink to it, as long as Duchy of Milan not deleted.
2.Raguseo sum it up pretty well. Nothing to add.
3.Also. Putting Italian as "language of culture" insted of Dalmatian which was spoken in Dubrovnik, adds some iridentic flavor to your edits. At least it seems so.
Ceha
22:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
At least regarding the place of death, I suggest " Milan, Duchy of Milan, today in Italy" as a compromise. I've seen it used in several articles and it seems to work well. Nikola 10:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Undeterminated?? Since when is it UNDETERMINATED? It is well know, but someone obviously cares about hiding the truth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.229.143 ( talk) 13:59, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I have changed
was a physicist, astronomer, mathematician, philosopher, diplomat, poet, and Jesuit from Ragusa (today Dubrovnik, in Croatia) who lived in Italy and, for some years, in France and England.
into
was a physicist, astronomer, mathematician, philosopher, diplomat, poet, and Jesuit from Ragusa (today Dubrovnik, in Croatia) who lived in some states of Apennine Peninsula (today Italy) and, for some years, in France and England.
Dubrovnik was not part of Croatia in that time-that is true. But , also , there was no any Italy at that time neither!
-- Anto ( talk) 15:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
The text reports:
"Ruđer Bošković (see names in other languages; May 18, 1711 – February 13, 1787) was a Croatian physicist, astronomer, mathematician, philosopher, diplomat, poet, and Jesuit from Ragusa (today Dubrovnik, in Croatia) who lived in some states of Italian Peninsula (today Italy) and, for some years, in France and England."
In the article abut
Ugo Foscolo he is considered Greek-italian becouse of his mother heritage.
Why in this article, Ruđer Bošković is not considered Croat-italian? His mother was italian (as the same article says) and his father ethnic croatian from Bosnia. So he his bot italian and croatian.
About Anto's edit; Bošković didn't live only in the italian peninsula, but also in Milan, Padua, etc... (mich are not in the peninsula but in continental Italy); so is more correct to say "some states of Italy". Noticing that "Italy" as a toponym exist since the ancient time, and it indicated (since Augustus) the geograpical region between the Alps and the Strait of Messina. So is absurd to say "there was no any Italy at that time", if you know that this name was already used at that time to indicate that region.
Goodbye and goodwork —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
87.11.172.63 (
talk)
14:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
To garbage with nationality and nationalism (I've quickly glanced over debates that went on)! My question is how can it be that this man is so atrociously depreciated? Electromagnetism and from which unified theory derives. 89.142.98.143 ( talk) 15:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
This is from the book of Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche known as Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future, back from 1886. To be precise, this is from the translation by Mario Faber, Oxford University Press, 1998, page 182:
“ | Boscovich: Roger Joseph Boscovich (1711-87), Italian-Serbian Jesuit mathematician and scientist whose Theory of Natural Philosophy was published in 1758, advancing a theory of dynamism, that is, that nature to be understood in terms of force, not mass. | ” |
This is from a book of Ioan Mackenzie James a British Royal mathematician, known as Remarkable Physicists: From Galileo to Yukawa, 2004, Cambridge University Press, page 55. There he wrote all about significant physicians:
“ | When it became clear that his mind was failing, Boscovich was moved to the Jesuit college in Monza. His condition rapidly worsened and was accompanied by other problems. He died of a lung ailment on February 13, 1787 and was buried in the Church of Santa Maria Bordone in Milan. No trace of his tomb can be seen nowadays. Today the citizens of Dubrovnik claim him as their most illustrious son. The Serbs claim him as a Serb, on his father's side; the Italians as an Italian, on his mother's side, and describe him as largely Italian by culture and career; while the French point to his adoption of French nationality. | ” |
This is from the book The Jesuits II: Cultures, Sciences, and the Arts, 1540-1773 from a group of authors, John W. O'Malley, Gauvin Alexander Bailey, Stephen J. Harris, 2002, University of Toronto Press, page 742:
“ | The case of Haji Abdulah might have been especially interesting to Boscovich in view of the fact that the Jesuit's own religious origins have been disputed. His mother was of Italian descent and Roman Catholic, but his Slavic father, Nicholas Boscovich, from Herzegovina, might have been Orthodox. While descent from an Orthodox father would hardly have affected the way Boscovich was viewed by eighteenth-century contemporaries in the Roman Catholic world, the issue has been more problematic in modern times, when religion has been perceived as a national marker in the Yugoslav and post-Yugoslav context. While the Jesuit Boscovich has been patriotically regarded as a part of the national intellectual legacy in Croatia, the possibility of an Orthodox father would carry the inconvenient implication that the hero was in part, by descent, a Serb. Boscovich, though he came from Ragusa and designated his native language as Slavic, did not actually identify himself as Serbian or Croatian. He did attribute his volatile temper to his Dalmatian character, and is supposed to have quoted St Jerome in reciting the Confiteor: Parce mihi Domine, quia Dalmata sum. Have mercy on me God, I am Dalmatian | ” |
This is from Ludwig Boltzmann: The Man who Trusted Atoms by Carlo Cercignani and Roger Penrose, Oxford University Press, 1998, page 54:
“ | [..]the family of Boscovich is of purely Serbian origin. | ” |
This is from the Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Paul Edwards, 1967, University of Michigan, page 350, the entry on Boscovich, Ruggiero Guiseppe:
“ | Boscovich was born at Ragusa (now Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia) of Serb and Italian parentage. | ” |
This is from the Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences by Samuel Kotz, Norman Lloyd Johnson and Campbell B. Read, John Wiley & Sons, 1982, page 303; Boscovich's entry:
“ | Boscovich was a son of a Serb who settled in Ragusa (we use above the Italian version of his name). | ” |
This is from Samuel Johnson and the New Science by Richard B. Schwartz, University of Wisconsin Press, 1971, page 39:
“ | In 1760 Johnson met two famous scientists. Between May and December he met on three occasions with Roger Boscovich, the Serbian physicist and mathematician. | ” |
This is from the Roger Joseph Boscovich, S.J., F.R.S., 1711-1787: Studies of His Life and Work on the 250th Anniversary of His Birth by Lancelot Law Whyte, G. Allen & Unwin, 1961, that we even use currently as a source to this article. These are the writer's notes in the beginning, page 17:
“ | The extraordinary career of Fr. Boscovich has long deserved the extended treatment now accorded him in this volume in which an international group of scientists tell of this 18th century Jugoslav Jesuit who distinguished himself in literary, scientific and diplomatic circles of all Europe. He was a mathematician, physicist, astronomer, geodesist, engineer and architect as well as poet, diplomatist, social figure and much-traveled personality. He combined Roman subtlety with Serb vigor, and Slavonic intensity of imagination with Western logical precision. He published about a hundred books and papers, of which de Lalande, the French astronomer said, “His magnum opus, his Theoria, endeavored to create a system of Natural Philosophy reducing to a single law all the forces of nature.” The work was the first general mathematical theory of atomism and made its author famous when it appeared in 1758. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society and was lionized in London, Oxford and Cambridge; he became a corresponding member of the French Academie. He was consulted by Pope Benedict XIV about the cracks in the Dome of St.Peter’s and recommended the circling of the cupola with five iron rings which allayed the fears of the collapse of Michaelangelo’s masterpiece.
The present collective effort suggests, but does not exhaust, Boscovich’s fertility. He was matematician, physicist, astronomer, geodesist, engineer and architect, as well as Jesuit, poet, diplomatist, social figure and much-travelled personality of eighteenth-century Europe (his life coinciding closely with those of Franklin, Hume, Euler, Diderot and d’Alembert). It has been said that he combined Roman subtlety with Serb vigour, and Slavonic intensity of imagination with Western logical precision. These generalizations at least serve to suggest what for me is the most striking characteristic of his mind: a peculiar blend of high passion and strict logic, of enthusiasm for simplicity and care for clarity in deduction. |
” |
...while this is of Elizabeth Hill, a Californian Professor on Slavonic studies:
“ | But there are other claims on him, too. Dubrovnik—Ragusa—is both geographically and historically part of Dalmatia. The Dalmatians, therefore, naturally consider him as their own. The Serbs emphasize his Serbian origin, for his paternal grandfather Boško came from Orahovo, a village in Popovo Polje in Hercegovina, the ancient Hum of medieval Serbia and part of Bosnia today. The Croats prefer to think of him as Croatian, for some 8 kilometres from Dubrovnik, which now falls within the present Republic of Croatia, there is a village of Orahov Dol, called Orahovo for short by its inhabitants. In both Orahovos the surname Boscovich figures in the old baptismal records, though in Orahov Dol the Boscovich family later became known as Krstić and Tomičić; in both the Rudjer Boscovich legend is cultivated. Today he can be described conveniently as a Jugoslav, for unquestionably he was born within the borders of the present Federation of the National Republics of Jugoslavia. | ” |
This is from Paul Rankov Radosavljevich - of Montengrin/Serbian descent, sure, but a relative opinion considering his achievements at the West; Who are the Slavs?: A Contribution to Race Psychology, R. D. Badger, 1919, page 141:
“ | It is a fact that the Slav gave a Roger (Ruggiero) Joseph Boscovich (1711-1787, a Serb, whose two brothers and his sister, Anitza Boshkovich or Boscovich, of Ragusa, were known in their time as poets)... | ” |
Development of Concepts of Physics: From the Rationalization of Mechanics to the First Theory of Atomic Structure, Arnold B. Arons, Addison-Wesley, 1965, page 709, entry of the Boscovich model:
“ | The Boscovich model. In 1758 the Serbian scientist Roger Boscovich suggested a model in which matter was to be viewed as composed of indivisible point centers of force. | ” |
The Science in History of John Desmond Bernal, Watts, 1965, page 1,011:
“ | An early attempt to work out the consequences of interatomic forces was made by Roger Boscovich (1711-78), a Serbian Jesuit priest who taught mathematics at Rome. | ” |
The following is page 52 from Annotated Readings in the History of Statistics by H. A. David, A. W. F. Edwards. 2001, Springer. Chapter 2, The Method of Situation, the Weighted Median, and Order Statistics:
“ | Preceding Legendre's 1805 publication of the method of least squares by almost 50 years, the Serbian scientist Roger Boscovich (1711-1787) put forward a method... | ” |
Find a Hotter Place!: A History of Nuclear Astrophysics of Ludwik Marian Celnikier, World Scientific, 2006, page 34:
“ | The Cartesian Universe was thus full. But the mechanical properties of his infinitely small particles remained a mystery, which the Serbian Jesuit Ruggero Boscovich solved a century later... | ” |
Page 100 of The how and the why: An Essay on the Origins and Development of Physical Theory by David Allen Park, 1988, Princeton University Press:
“ | In 1758 the Serbian Jesuit Roger Boscovich published A Theory of Natural Philosophy Reduced to a Single Law of Natural Forces (1922) that did away with first matter altogether. | ” |
The Cambridge History of Eighteenth-century Philosophy by Knud Haakonssen, Cambridge University Press, 2006, page 1,153, Boscovich entry:
“ | Boscovich, Roger Joseph b. in Dubrovnik, 1711; d. Milan, 1787. Serbian-Italian Jesuit and scientific polymath, professor of mathematics and astronomer in Italy, later Director for Optics of the French Navy.... | ” |
2nd page of Beyond Beta: Other Continuous Families of Distributions with Bounded Support and Applications by Samuel Kotz and Johan Rene, World Scientific, 2004:
“ | Sigler (1984) and more recently Farebrother (1990) provide some additional details on Thomas Simpson in particular on the correspondence with Roger Boscovich (1711-1787) a famous Italian astronomer and statistician of Serbian origin. | ” |
Another also important is from The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy of Simon Blackburn, Oxford University Press, 2005, page 45, entry on this dude:
“ | Boscovich, Roger Joseph (1711-87) Jesuit mathematician and scientist. Born in Dubrovnik of Serbian and Italian parents,.. | ” |
Enigma post komunizma of the Mislav Kukoč, Croatian Philological Society, 1997, page 178:
“ | Roger Joseph Boscovic...of Serb and Italian parentage | ” |
Great Scientific Experiments: Twenty Experiments that Changed our View of the World of Rom Harre ISBN:0486422631 Courier Dover Publications, 2002, page 221:
“ | Boscovich, R. J. (1711-87) Serbian theoretical physicist | ” |
The Slavonic Encyclopaedia of Joseph Slabey Rouček, 1949, Philosophical Library, page 110:
“ | J. B. BOSKOVIC, ROGER J. (1711-1787), Serb Professor of Astronomy, Mathematics & Physics, and of the greatest scientists that ever lived. | ” |
I can copy paste far more quotations referring to him as a Croat. As for Nietzsche he referred to him as a Pole, a mistake for sure by Nietzsche but he certainly never referred to him as a Serb. The most important thing above all however is that Boscovich himself never mentioned Serbia or Serbs by one thing, on the other side he made several notes about Croatia, Croats and Croatian language identifiying with those at the same time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.236.64 ( talk) 21:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
If you can copy paste far more - do it. Let's see your best shot.
You have a citation to the up from him.
He might've never mentioned Serbia or Serbs, but his father greatly studied the Serbian Orthodox monasteries - and was himself an Orthodox Serb. What are Roger's notes about Croatia, Croats and Croatian language? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anti-Note ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
It's not listed at WP:GA, nor can I find a nomination on Talk:Roger Joseph Boscovich/GA1, and neither on the talk page itself; so how come this is a GA-class article? Admiral Norton ( talk) 21:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't Theory of Natural philosophy (his most famous work?) be mentioned in the lead?
212.200.240.232 (
talk)
15:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Wasn't his father from the then Ottoman Empire witch is todays Bosnia & Hercogovina and don't Croatians & Serbs share some surnames? 121.213.253.195 ( talk) 04:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
i wanted to add a tag to word some in the lede sentence, but it inserted a section tag. someone please correct this. 93.86.221.197 ( talk) 00:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
I reverted several recent edits. Some of these were clearly vandalism, but I also reverted the following well intended changes:
In James Clerk Maxwell's "Atom" article in the 9th EB he discusses Boskovic"s theories about this subject matter at some length, including his concept that it's impossible for 2 real physical entities to ever come into contact with each other, and that their interaction was due to interacting forces, rather than interacting contact physics. 68.90.145.25 ( talk) 00:20, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
This article ought to be renamed into " Ruđer Bošković" over redirect, per WP:COMMONNAME. Sources overwhelmingly use the Serbo-Croatian name. I performed extensive Google tests on the subject and found that only Google's general search engine yields more hits for "Roger Joseph Boscovich", which is likely due to Wikipedia mirror sites and the long-standing title of this article. As far as actual sources are concerned, however, "Ruđer Bošković" and its various transliterated forms are overwhelmingly more numerous than "Roger Joseph Boscovich" or particularly "Ruggero Giuseppe Boscovich".
In short, "Roger Joseph Boscovich" (and variants) has 1,849 hits on Google Books and 409 combined Google Scholar hits. "Ruđer Bošković" (and variants) has 9,020 English hits on Google Books, and 2,793 combined Google Scholar hits. (The Italian name variants are nowhere close.)
The Google tests are all English language searches, and particular care was taken to avoid the numerous references to the Ruđer Bošković Institute (without the "-institute" parameter the results are even more convincing, of course). The largest result is in boldface.
-- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 12:35, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
...here? Bošković's legacy is absolutely celebrated by Italy. The only complete edition of all the Bošković's works, today, is what is being done in Italy.-- Presbite ( talk) 14:49, 4 September 2010 (UTC)