Talk:Florence Cathedral

old

Can anyone figure out if it's Santa Maria del Fiore or Santa Maria dei Fiori ("of the flower" vs. "of the flowers")? I thought it was the latter, and Google gives lots of hits for both. - Montréalais

It is the former (Santa Maria del Fiore) in all the books I have seen having researched the dome of it for a paper - 24.5.100.229

does it matter... i mean it isnt that big of a difference

Actually, yes, it does matter. People come to this website looking for facts, so precision is very important. 71.198.43.182 (talk) 20:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

and it's nickname, the Duomo, actually means the cathedral, not the dome. 'Duomo' is an Italian word for cathedral, and it is typically used to describe the main cathedral or church of a city. ~2026-28207-72 (talk) 19:36, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

size

i cant find out how big it is anywhere!

My art teacher said it was 106 ft high.

According to Michele Fanelli (an engineer who has worked on the maintainence of the dome and who wrote a book -- Brunelleschi's Cupola -- with Giovanni Fanelli (brother?), the height of the drum supporting the dome is 53.85 m. The dome itself adds another 35.75 m (about 117 feet Brit measure), for a total height of 89.60 m. The climb to the top from ground level is 463 steps. You can do it in 10 breathless minutes so long as you are not behind a slowpoke.

216.113.201.242 00:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Alan Donald (donald@portal.ca)

spelling

In "transcribe a circle on a kone face", is "kone" an obscure architectural term, or should it be corrected to "cone"? Wdfarmer 04:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Must be the work of some vandal. I've changed it to "cone". JoJan 11:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

wrong info

I cut this sentence about the dome: One obscure architect at the time even proposed to fill the Duomo with soil before the dome was built so that it could be built on top of the shaped dirt (it was not yet known how to build a dome with that much weight and magnitude). When asked how to get the dirt out, it was proposed that the city should fill the dirt with coins and the paupers would eventually empty the dome.

This is popular legend about the Pantheon in Rome, which has a large dome too. The exact description of the legend can be found in this book: Guida all'Italia leggendaria, misteriosa, insolita e leggendaria, Volume 4 (Lazio, Rome section), Oscar Mondadori, Verona, 1971 --82.104.171.102 12:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC) oops I was not logged on --Sailko 12:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The problem with building the dome was not that the formula for concrete had been lost, as the article states. The difficulty was that no dome that large had been built: it wasn't possible to find timbers large enough to create the centering, the weight of the centering would also have been a problem, etc. Brunelleschi solved those problems, but the exact nature of his solution is still not known. Ross King, in his excellent book, "Brunelleschi's Dome," goes into this in some detail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.236.232 (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

title

Isn't this best known as the "Florence Duomo", or some such? I've been in Florence twice (most recently, er, yesterday), and I've never heard its proper name before. john k 02:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

"Santa Maria del Fiore" is the official name of the Duomo. Any other name would only lead to confusion. JoJan 16:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Whuh? How would Florence Duomo or Duomo of Florence possibly lead to any confusion? There is only one Duomo in Florence. Wikipedia naming conventions specify that we use the "most common name", not the "official name". john k 19:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Surely it should be either Duomo di Firenze or Florence Cathedral? I'd be in favour of the latter: use English.--Stonemad GB 09:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this si a weird name for the page. It should be called the Florence Duomo or something like that. I lived in Florence, was in the duomo piazza every day, and i have never heard it called Santa Maria del fiore. Frithjh 03:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Of course you heard it called "duomo" in Florence: the word is just Italian for cathedral. It's not a proper noun.82.27.181.141 (talk) 09:58, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Although duomo is simply the Italian word for cathedral, this particular cathedral is known in English as The Duomo; it has no other name. Calling it Florence Cathedral is itself confusing.

Nuttyskin (talk) 21:59, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, really? You realize this thread is 16 years old? Johnbod (talk) 01:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Design

I've scanned through the article, but I didn't find any mention of Arnolfo's interesting design. Most churches are designed in the shape of a cross with the nave, 2 transepts, and apse. However, Arnolfo went a step further. When he designed the cathedral, he put 5 chapels in each of the transepts and the apse, so if looking at a blueprint, it resembles a flower. . .florence, santa maria del fiore, flower. . .

I cannot find any reference to this. But if you have, then add this information to the article, stating your reference(s). JoJan 14:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

finally found one! https://duomo.firenze.it/en/about-us/history/art#:~:text=Torna%20su-,The%20masters%3A%20architects%20and%20sculptors%20in%20the%2014th%20and%2015th,the%20%22City%20of%20Flowers%22. Microxstephn (talk) 12:03, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

History

The article says that Arnolfo's original design was reduced in size--actually, it was increased in size. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.128.37 (talk • contribs)

Can anyone here tell me what this thing is made of besides stone?

The domes, and I expect much of it behind the stone facing, are brick. The facade & most of the walls are different colours of stone, mostly marble. Johnbod 17:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

PLANS & DRAWINGS OF Santa Maria del Fiore (Il Duomo)

Does anyone know if these plans are PUBLIC DOMAIN. If yes, where can they be accessed? thanks in advance the colour guru124.180.214.183 00:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Duomo of Florence → Florence Cathedral — a) Consistency with other Cathedrals, b) People are more likely to search on other titles such as Florence Duomo than the rather awkward English of the present title, c) Use English Johnbod 15:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Since this is not a vote, please explain the reasons for your recommendation.

• Support as nom Johnbod 15:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support. We have words in English for both Firenze and duomo, and if we change one, it makes sense to change the other - particularly when this will make the title easier to understand, and it appears to be the most popular English title. Dekimasuよ! 03:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. —  AjaxSmack  07:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. Also, it would be very easily recognized by English-speakers & it would make linking to the article easy and second nature. - Ev 20:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments:

Comment: I don't really see how the present title makes sense duomo is Italian, Florence is not, so if we are having duomo we should have Il Duomo di Firenze. The English version Florence Cathedral sounds like a brand of downmarket English cheese or some sort of 1960s song. Personally I would like to see Cathedral of St Maria del Fiore, Florence or even Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore. Cathedral of St Mary of Florence sounds wrong to my ears and no one would search for that. Whatever is selected there needs to be plenty of redirects as the red links in this paragraph illustrate. Giano 20:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Current redirects are:Florence Cathedral, Florence cathedral, Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore (previously title I think), Duomo (Florence), Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence), Florence Duomo, Santa Maria del Fiore, Duomo di Santa Maria del Fiore, Santa Maria di Fiore,Il Duomo !, Cathedral of Florence, Brunelleschi's Dome, & maybe some I've missed. You could make up a whole cheese counter from that lot. I think the lesson is - keep it simple. Johnbod 21:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia names things based on how they are named in the English-language literature. Personal naming preferences really aren't important. Some evidence needs to be provided in favour (or against) the options based upon actual usage. Noel S McFerran 17:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Well you are the English speakers - what do you say? How do you refer to it? Giano 18:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Ghits: "Florence Cathedral" 54,100

"Duomo of Florence" 19,200

"Florence Duomo" 28,800

"Cathedral of Florence" 30,300

"Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore" 546

"Cathedral of St Maria del Fiore, Florence" 0

"Santa Maria del Fiore" gets 105,000 (English) hits, but of course many will be combined with Basilica, Cathedral etc.

I was about to say that I don’t find Duomo of Florence particularly jarring as duomo, unlike dom, is a well-established loan-word in English. And I would have been wrong! It’s not in my copy of the Collins Concise Dictionary. —Ian Spackman 06:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

It's in my Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary from 1961 so Duomo is clearly a well established loan word. In my experience people use the proper noun 'The Duomo' to refer in shorthand to the entire building. --Joopercoopers 11:08, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

There is also the question of what the best name is in a book/site/list devoted to Florence, as opposed to the title to use in a non-specific context, as here. Johnbod 20:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I want titles of buildings to do two things: to let the reader know where to look in the index of a ‘proper’ book on architecture (which I suspect in this case means Santa Maria del Fiore); but also to be easily identified by the non-specialist when it appears in a category listing (which means we need the word Florence and either Cathedral, or Cattedrale). The requirement for a page title to be category-friendly, by the way, probably means that we should almost always include a placename in the title of an article about a building.

So, I guess, Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence Cathedral). Or possibly Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence)—I am sure can expect our readers to guess what cattedrale means.

I wonder if it might be worth reviving the debate over Wikipedia:Naming conventions (architecture)? I wouldn’t have much to contribute beyond what I have just said. But it would be good to have some guidance from people knowledgable about the subject. —Ian Spackman 06:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This article has been renamed from Duomo of Florence to Florence Cathedral as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 08:46, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I read the move discussion, but I still feel like this title is so awkward and weird. In english I feel like it is almost always called "the Duomo", although that is informal and dependent on context. I feel like fewer people know it as the "Florence Cathedral." Duomo of Florence still seems better. Maybe we can think of another alternative as well. Bonus Onus 21:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

"Florence Cathedral!" Unspeakably foolish and ignorant. Who can keep up with all the "decisions" being made in this manner?--Wetman 04:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Daft move indeed. In this move to uniform the world, are our English friends going to have London Cathedral forced upon them? - Will they even know where it is? Giano 06:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I really deplore this obsession with moving everything to English translations, even when that isn't the common name. This edifice is always known as the Duomo. I'm English. I've visited Florence. And no English-language guidebook I've seen refers to it as "Florence Cathedral". Wikipedia policy says "use common name" not "translate everything into English even when it then becomes completely unrecognisable to everyone who knows it". -- Necrothesp 09:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

All possible variant names, and some impossible ones, are redirects, and the text of the article does not use the term. See the ghit survey above also. Johnbod 23:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The obvious solution is to request a page move here too. Giano 10:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Not really. London, Paris, Rome, Edinburgh, Vienna, Prague, Madrid & New York are among the cities that just don't have a Cathedral referred to as foo Cathedral (or Duomo). Of course we all know what all of those are called, don't we? Johnbod 23:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Google is not a particularly reliable source and should not really be used to prove anything. Searching for "Florence Cathedral" produces many hits that are actually "Florence's cathedral" (not the same thing at all) and sites which have been translated verbatim from the Italian. In addition, we have to remember that the internet is dominated by Americans, many of whom seem incapable of accepting that not everything has to be translated into English (hence the common retention in America of Marseilles and Lyons, which haven't been used in the UK in decades). Much more reliable, to my mind, are English language guidebooks. And reputable guidebooks almost all refer to the edifice as the Duomo. -- Necrothesp 08:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I think Ian Spackman & I cover that point in the debate above. "What-the-guidebook-calls-it" and the correct title of a WP article are often different things. Should all Italian cathedrals be titled with "Duomo"? 11:00, 17 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbod (talk • contribs)

Yes, if that's what they're commonly known as! -- Necrothesp 11:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Why is a simple thing being laboured so? If there's no agreed anglicised nomenclature, we call buildings in non-english speaking countries by there local names - Château de Fontainebleau, Angkor Wat, Masjid al-Haram etc. So we just need to agree if it's the Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore or the Duomo di Santa Maria del Fiore - any number of other possibilities, for those who don't know the full name, can then by conjured up as redirects. --Joopercoopers 11:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Exactly - the problem is there is no agreed Italian nomenclature! Just out of interest, do you think all sixty-odd Italian Cathedrals should move to the "proper" names? The French ones used to be like that (not changed by me) & I can't tell you how useless and unhelpful it was. Johnbod 23:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed it seems even more obvious when we find Basilica di San Lorenzo di Firenze alive and well and living happily in wikispace. Or should we rename it Florence Cathedral II - this time, the Medici need somewhere to lie? --Joopercoopers 12:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

My opinion, for whatever it matters, is the current English title: "Florence Cathedral" with the ample list of redirects listed above. In conversational Italian I call it "il duomo", and when discussing it in English I happily interchange "duomo", "Santa Maria del Fiore", "cathedral", and "basilica". I'm sure we can also find plenty of alternative transliterations if we turn to nineteenth-century English travel literature. I also don't think we should start changing the titles for German Kathedrale to "Dom", just because that's what they call it. Ultimately I like the current title because it provides the basic, no-nonsense description of the object in question. We have a whole article that follows to give all of the alternative descriptions. However, I see no reason for the official title to be littered with Italian words and prepositions when unnecessary, as in Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore or Duomo di Santa Maria del Fiore. Basilica of Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence or Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence successfully integrate proper English with official name (and location). Now we should move over to San Lorenzo and get rid of those prepositions (but stop short of translating it to "St Lawrence"), i.e. Basilica of San Lorenzo, Florence --Stomme 16:11, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

How about titling it in it's literal english translation? In other words, " Cathedral of St. Mary of the Flower" After that, in the subheading, you can mention it's Italian spelling as well as it's common name amongst English speaking peoples. In that way, you establish it's precise name and provide for other more familiar names that may change over the course of time. -2 November 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.17.99.90 (talk) 17:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The facade

With all the new images of the Duomo's facade, I wonder if anybody is aware of its date? --Wetman 12:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Only people who have read the article’s words, perhaps. But at least those…. (Assuming that anyone has read an article called ‘Florence Cathedral’. (And with a capital C))—Ian Spackman 13:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

It is all explained in the article under the header "Façade". JoJan 13:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Dome's Lantern

Construction of the lantern was begun a few months before his death in 1446. Then, for 25 years, little progress was possible, due to alterations by several architects. The lantern was finally completed by Brunelleschi's friend Michelozzo in 1461

I think there is a mistake... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.164.252.165 (talk) 03:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You're right. It was 15 years later. JoJan (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Competition

Ghiberti actually won the competition. Djamorpheus 22:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djamorpheus (talk • contribs)

Wrong. JoJan (talk) 18:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Uh no bra, check your sources:google --Djamorpheus 12:34, 8 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djamorpheus (talk • contribs)

You are talking about the bronze doors of the Baptistery, when Ghiberto won the competition against Brunelleschi and become famous for the "Gates of Paradise". This article however relates to the Florence cathedral. Ghiberti lost the competition for the Dome against Brunelleschi, who would become famous for his dome on the cathedral. JoJan (talk) 15:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

nm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.250.123 (talk) 23:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Duomo Firenze Apr 2008.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Duomo Firenze Apr 2008.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:29, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Contradiction

In the sidebar, it says the cathedral is 90 metres (300 ft) tall. However, in the "Dome" section, it says:

"This brings the total height of the dome and lantern to 114.5 metres (375 ft)."

Is there some kind of mistake? - 24.150.238.199 (talk) 00:50, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Name in Italian

Does anyone know the correct Italian name for the Florence Cathedral? In the Italian wikipedia the Italian name is: Basilica Cattedrale Metropolitana di Santa Maria del Fiore.

In this English article the Italian name is: Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore (Italian) Jcardazzi (talk) 02:48, 16 April 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

History section should contain present and recent development

Yes, unfortunatelly I can not edit it myself, I lack the knowledge, but the history section ends just too abruptly. What is it now? Museum? Living church with religious live inside? The nave seems so empty and dead, are there any masses yet? Was that closed as a church, made a museum? (When?) There are no chairs pictured, just the floor. Is mass still conducted in some small section of the church or are the chairs being moved in and out? Are there any sources for any of that? Reo ⁺ 11:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

WAY too many images

This article is loaded with images. Can we decide which ones to include and which ones aren't the most valuable? Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 22:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism Attempt

This article was vandalized by 43.241.146.147 on Feb 28, 2018. Request to Semi-Protect the Page. Crazycoolguy11111 19:08,28 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Dome of Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence).jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Dome of Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence).jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 6, 2020. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2020-03-06. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:29, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Picture of the day

Florence Cathedral, formally the Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore, is a basilica in Florence, Italy. It was begun in 1296 in the Gothic style to a design of Arnolfo di Cambio, and was structurally completed by 1436, with the dome designed by Filippo Brunelleschi. The exterior of the cathedral is faced with polychrome marble panels in various shades of green and pink, bordered by white, and has an elaborate 19th-century Gothic Revival facade by Emilio De Fabris.

This picture shows the curved interior of the dome; the surface was originally whitewashed, but Cosimo I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany, decided to have it painted with a representation of the Last Judgment. This enormous work, comprising 3,600 m² (39,000 ft²) of painted surface, was started in 1568 by Giorgio Vasari and Federico Zuccari, and not completed until 1579. The upper portion, near the roof lantern, represents the Twenty-Four Elders of the Book of Revelation, and was finished by Vasari before his death in 1574. Zuccari and his collaborators finished the other portions – from top to bottom, choirs of angels; Christ, Mary and saints; virtues, gifts of the Holy Spirit and the Beatitudes; and capital sins and Hell. These frescoes are considered Zuccari's greatest work, but the quality of the artwork is uneven because of the input of different artists and their varying techniques.Photograph credit: Livioandronico2013

"quick facts external video"

despite the questionable use of 'quick facts' for external content, it does not look very elegant. Opened up it shows two grey blocks with the repeated info and empty space. I would prefer to move it to the external links. MenkinAlRire 15:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Dome of Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Cupola del Brunelleschi

If we create a separate article on the dome? In the Italian section, a separate article is devoted to the dome Товболатов (talk) 18:06, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Statues

I'm finding the wording/structure of the statues paragraph confusing - Donatello and another sculpted statues for the front which were then found to be too small... the paragraph then leaps into Donatello producing the "first" statue a year or so later??? presumably the first statue of a different series, but this isn't explained Microxstephn (talk) 05:58, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Original research in Marian iconography in Florence's cathedral section

Hello User:Jp1008 - you may have seen that I added an original research tag to your section "Marian iconography in Florence's cathedral". This is because the section lacks citations and often makes subjective or otherwise unsupported claims, which is not in line with one of Wikipedia's core policies: No Original Research.

Particularly unusual is the subsection "The Flower and Isaiah's prophecy", which states:

Up until 1296 the cathedral was dedicated to Saint Reparata, considered up to that point the patroness of Florence. But the Florentian diocese decided that year to rededicate the cathedral —and as a result the city as a whole— to the Virgin Mary, under the specific title of "Our Lady of the Flower", thus making a direct connection to the city name, Florentia.

By naming the cathedral after the "flower", Florence consciously connected its own identity to a biblical prophecy from the Book of Isaiah which mentions a "stem" rising from the root of the descendants of Jesse, the father of King David. In the latin Vulgate Bible used in the Middle Ages, the passage makes a direct reference to a flower or "flos".

et egredietur virga de radice Iesse et flos de radice eius ascendet (Isaiah 11:1).

In modern translation:

But a shoot shall grow out of the stump of Jesse, a twig shall sprout from his stock.

Thus, the Latin translation introduced the word flos as part of the prophecy as well as virga, meaning "shoot" or "green twig" in Latin; similar to the Latin "virgo" or virgin, which reinforces the reading of this prophetic passage as Christ, the flower, being created from Mary, the "virga". The prophesy was understood as Mary being the stem and Christ the flower of salvation.

As I understand it, this quote from the Book of Isaiah refers to the Tree of Jesse, but to extrapolate that it was this quote explicitly that inspired the Duomo's renaming is unsound given the lack of any corroborating sources. The Tree of Jesse article seems to suggest that this was a fortunate near-pun rather than a significant theological position in the period. I also can't wrap my head around the claim that the cathedral being dedicated to Mary meant the city itself was being dedicated to Mary - this also conflicts with the next claim that the cathedral was "named...after the 'flower'", which isn't true; it was named after a particular Marian mode of representation. Mary was often depicted in walled gardens/beside trellises, a decision drawing on ideas of the New Eve and the Garden of Eden, and was of course associated with both the rose and the lily, but to make the claim that the cathedral was being devoted to this particular mode gives undue weight to what seems to be WP:SYNTH or WP:OR.

Much of the other subsections in this section make similar unsupported claims that would do very well in an essay or article, but should not be included here without appropriate citations (i.e. 20th/21st century articles, chapters, books conducting rigorous and academic study). In particular, making references to how the works comprising the cathedral are "intended" to narrate the life of the Virgin/inspire a particular mode of looking from viewers is very tricky since the cathedral took so extraordinarily long to be constructed. It comes across as WP:SUBJECTIVE to me.

I'd like to invite you to defend the subsections here or to add corroborating sources to the article, since I recognise that you have put in work into including these subsections and they may well be attested in the literature. I'm no expert when it comes to Santa Maria del Fiore but am happy to grow more educated on the matter. Thank you, Becsh (talk) 15:34, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the observations. I'll dob my homework. Jp1008 (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't find the claim at all surprising - the passage in Isaiah pretty much was regarded as creating "a significant theological position in the period" and appears in different contexts all over the place. But the connection to renaming the Cathedral should be fairly easy to reference (and perhaps word rather better). Johnbod (talk) 19:07, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

That is correct. I only tried to explain further how it connects to Mary as you find these assertions but don't know really what to make of them. Jp1008 (talk) 21:05, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

If there aren't attested links between the prophecy from Isaiah and the dedication of the cathedral, it shouldn't be included. It might appear to connect to Mary, but that doesn't mean it connects with Santa Maria del Fiore (especially since, as I say, it was common iconographic practice to depict Mary in gardens/with flowers during the period). The use of the term "incarnational awareness" is also odd to me, and I can't find anything to suggest this is a common term in Catholic studies or art history of the late medieval period/Florentine Renaissance. Becsh (talk) 21:10, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I have removed the section due to a lack of verifiability and original research coupled with failure to discuss. If you wish to continue working on the current draft (to which I have added invisible comments highlighting major issues), I have pasted the section into my sandbox. Becsh (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you Becsh for that save. I did write a long reply 2 weeks ago that was almost done, but then work got the best of me and left it unsent. Here it is:

0) "It seems hard to believe many of your assertions"

I can relate to your concerns regarding some of the statements but they are all based on Timothy Verdon's work. If you don't know who he is, you could think he is any researcher with an opinion. However, Monsignor Timothy Verdon is considered one of the world's leading experts in christian sacred art, advisor to the Vatican on this topic, "with more than 100 books and articles" to his credit. He can also be considered the top world expert on the art of the Florence cathedral, currently being "a Canon in Santa Maria del Fiore, Director of the Office of Sacred Art of the Archdiocese of Florence and of the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo (Cathedral Museum), whose new installation he designed in 2012–15." (See his wikipedia article: Timothy Verdon). I do say "According to Vernon" when I quote him as per standard Wikimedia practice.

1) "200 years" objection

You say that "the works comprising the cathedral are 'intended' to narrate the life of the Virgin [and] inspire a particular mode of looking from viewers is very tricky since the cathedral took so extraordinarily long to be constructed." (my italics). But yes, it was a conscious decision maintained for the 200 years it took to finish the major artworks. Says Vernon, not me. And (in jest) if all of this is a conspiracy, it is hard to escape it, as he wrote the guidebook to the museum and probably edited the text of the signs, given that he was the project director). Jokes aside, once you "see" it visiting the cathedral and the museum, it is impossible to "unsee".

It sounds so incredible for us today that an objective would be maintained for 200 years, but remember this was the church, using the monumental decoration to promote a Marian devotion in a cathedral dedicated to the Virgin. On a more practical level, this cathedral took centuries to complete because it was so ambitious and was privately funded by the Arte della Lana guild, the richest one in Florence (and very rich even compared to most European kingdoms). Everyone knew there would be delays due to wars, plagues, etc. Given that the donors had approved the program (as was usual for any art comission at the time), no one would have thought to propose changing the program as it would set the whole thing decades and a cost a lot of money.

2) Single source: Valid point. Especially for such a long section and even it is is "only" Vernon.

3) Florence is not 'dedicated' to Mary: Point taken. Moreover, the patron saint of Florence is actually John the Baptist.

4) Isaiah as source of Christ the flower and Mary the stem: This may be too academic a detail for this article, so I will remove this subsection. The info is extracted from:Tree of Jesse. Any discussion on the topic itlsef should be made in that article's TP.

5) Incarnational awareness: (See [] as the section was removed). This is the theological view that occurred in the 13th century that emphasized Christ's corporeal existence, which increased Mary's importance as it was through her that this was possible.

"The spread of Marian devotion in the later Middle Ages reflected a new incarnational awareness of Christ's humanity, and thus also of the body he assumed from Mary's body. The choice of sculpture showing the body for the decoration of Santa Maria del Fiore was related to this theological emphasis." (italics from the original) [Vernon, Op Cit. p. 50].

After learning this, you realize you cannot fully "get" Florence's cathedral without the theological context in which it was designed and built. In fact, no art can be fully appreciate without its context, which can be quite complex to do. This is what motivated my to write this section. When visiting the cathedral, I was sure no of the other tourist knew about any of this. It allows you see to the cathedral as a whole work, and tie it with the imposing reconstruction at a 1:1 scale of its old façade in the Opera del Duomo Museum).

Thanks to all for your feedback, with a special thanks to Becsh!!
Jp1008 (talk) 04:23, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

0. I can relate to your concerns regarding some of the statements but they are all based on Timothy Verdon's work

I appreciate Verdon's place in this discourse, but the references don't provide page numbers allowing readers to go away and independently verify your claims. It is also advisable to use a wide range of sources to avoid implying undue weight; this lengthy section relies on a single source, which is inadvisable regardless of the place Verdon has in the critical conversation. Even if there were other citations from Verdon's other publications this would be improved, and I recommend you consider this when you hopefully continue to work on the article!

1. I know exactly what you mean, but it remains that we need a wider range of sources attesting to this being a consistent effort and singular intention throughout the production of the works you mention. I disagree that no one would have thought to propose changing the program, though - this is speculating as to intention. I personally think that the simpler explanation is that the cathedral was decorated with a singular intention (to foster Florence's Marian devotion, which had always been especially strong) rather than that the Marian works in the cathedral are part of a longstanding campaign for the cathedral to try and exact a particular emotional response from churchgoers. It is simpler to suggest that, for example, a cathedral that already contains a large painting of the Annunciation will not end up with another one; this doesn't have to be part of a longstanding and intentional campaign, but can instead come about more naturally.

4. I think the issue isn't even that it is too academic but that there may not be sources demonstrating that the prophecy was the reason behind the specific Marian representatory mode (Madonna del fiore) that was selected in the dedication. There may well be sources for this, but without that bridge between the prophecy and the dedication it is simply too speculative to include.

5. The problem is that this is not actually a theological position; Vernon is using his own phrase (incarnational awareness), but he isn't saying this is a common term. I think the section misrepresents the position as something more widely discussed. If it was phrased with words to the effect of 'Vernon suggests that Marian devotion reflected an emboldened "incarnational awareness" in the later Middle Ages' etc. it would be easier to swallow, but as it stands the section suggests that the term 'incarnational awareness' is widely used in theological circles when it is not.

I agree that you can more fully appreciate the cathedral with this theological context in mind, but this project does not aim to use context to push a certain narrative or reading, or else to teach people how to look at something like a cathedral. Rather, Wikipedia is concerned with accumulating sources in order to highlight cultural and critical consensus. Rewriting this section from this angle (i.e. describing what is in the cathedral and how different critics have assessed its relevance) would do much to justify its inclusion.

I'm very keen for you to keep working on the section and can offer support in copy-editing and commenting! It might be worth trying to develop a list of relevant texts that could be used as sources before writing long sections like this in future, however, because it tends to foster a more widely-sourced final text. Becsh (talk) 11:53, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for well-argued observations! Jp1008 (talk) 16:54, 21 February 2026 (UTC)