Talk:Alessandro Cagliostro

message: Following some recent edits, this article has become a paradigm example of how not to handle NPOV.  It reads as if someone had gone through and inserted "Some say..." in front of every single claim.  This makes a mockery of encyclopedic writing; who says, and how credible are their claims? Is there even any reason to question these claims, or do they merely sound implausible to one or another editor? - Mustafaa 03:30, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've given the entire article an overhaul, which should fix a number of these problems. I've nonetheless had to fall back to saying 'some accounts hold...' in front of some parts, since the whole history of the man is shrouded in rumour, propaganda and mysticism. --Spudtater 19:30, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment 2

message: My main acquaintance until now with a detailed account is in Lewis Spence's Encyclopedia of the Occult, republished by Dover; over a hundred years old by now and perhaps not reliable. I'm wondering if anyone has read it? I'll have to study and compare it and the writeup overleaf for any significant differences, but I'm wondering if it's worth the bother.  What's interesting in Spence is that he credits the fortune generated by Cagliostro's swindling as providing the foundation for his patronage of maternity hospitals and orphanages across Europe, i.e. hospitals for the poor, perhaps the foundation, one would think, of the tradition that led to Shrine Hospitals; the con-man as philanthropist in an age when the nobility had no concern at all for anyone lesser than themselves.  Spence's account also details his initiation into the Egyptian Rite by the Count St. Germain; and other juicy tidbits.Skookum1 21:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Lewis Spence]]'s version

message: see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Gro%C3%9F-Cophta - I added a reference in the section dealing with Cagliostro's life being a role model for several works of fiction. Goethe wrote the piece "Der Groß-Cophta" in 1791 (see link).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.171.35.180 (talk) 10:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johann Wolfgang Goethe's impact 

message: Obviously Theveneau knew the Palermo dossier, but could not produce it, or a copy of it, in court. So, Cagliostro got away with it, in the oldest politician's manner of "stout denial".... Kraxler 20:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Theveneau de Morande

message: Concerning the 'In Fiction' section.  There is a reference to the Lupin III movie titled The Castle of Cagliostro, which states: 'it holds no relation to the historical figure.'  This is not entirely true.  There are elements in the story that seem to be based on the life of the Count.  First is that the character Clarisse (who is to be a young bride to the count) is imprisoned in a tower whose only entrance is a trap door.  This parallels the fortress of San Leo where the count was imprisoned.  Also, the Count in the movie is an expert forger, as was the Count of Cagliostro.
So in light of this i am proposing that this reference be changed to read as follows: 
In the Lupin III movie titled The Castle of Cagliostro, the villain of the story is based upon the historical figure the Count, an expert forger.
:I too believe there to be a relationship between Cagliostro and the Count, but most aspects were actually taken from Leblanc's two books involving the Countess of Cagliostro. In the book, Clarisse is the heroine and she marries Lupin. 
:It would perhaps be better to write that "The Castle of Cagliostro contains several references to Cagliostro—such as it's setting in a medieval town inspired in Italy or the fact the Count, like the real Cagliostro, was a forger—but also to other works of fiction related to Cagliostro, namely The Countess Cagliostro and its sequel The Revenge of Cagliostro, both by Maurice Leblanc, creator of the famous Arsène Lupin character."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ishikawa Minoru (talk • contribs) 02:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was told the "Countess of Cagliostro" is supposed to be this Cagliostro's daughter?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.34.210 (talk) 12:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lupin III 

message: I've been doing a lot of Napoleon research for a project of mine in recent weeks and came here though a series of searches.
The article mentions that Napoleon held an investigation into Cagliostro's death and that it was by such the rest of Europe
accepted his demise. I haven't found any collaborating reference to this claim, or any connection to Napoleon directly to Cagliostro in life or death.  Could someone please find some source to cite in this matter? Joeteller (talk) 21:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Napoleon Investigation? 

message: I noticed that my edit on Cagliostro being of Jewish ancestry was deleted.Why?The Balsamo family was Jewish.Giuseppe had extensive knowledge of the Jewish Cabbalah.The Best of Sicily magazine also states that Giuseppe Balsamo was born on 2 June 1743 in Palermo's Albergheria,formerly the old Jewish Quarter.jeanne (talk) 08:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted your edits because they were unsourced. Please chek WP:RS and WP:CITE. After I read the source you mentioned, I'm even more sure of what I did. The source says he was born in what was the Jewish quarter, not that he was born to a Jewish family. His knowledge of Jewish Cabbalah also doesn't prove that he was born to a Jewish family. Many people have had a profound knowledge of Jewish Cabbalah without being jewish. If you want to mention that he was born in the Jewish quarter citing that source, it is fine by me. But I will dispute any other interpretation from that source as it may constitute an original research from your part.--Legion fi (talk) 05:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Again, It has been said to you in your user page, talk pages aren't for general discussion about the topic. You may point out whatever you want, but as I said in the revert summary, source it, or it didn't happened.--Legion fi (talk) 05:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Jewish origins

message: Combined the "In Manga" section to the fiction. Since the comic book references are in there, I see no reason why that shouldn't be with them.
208.255.118.242 (talk) 22:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  minor edit 

message: How much of this information is completely dependent on the claim that he was Balsamo?  If their not the same person then who did what?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.50.78 (talk) 21:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: They are the same person. The article plainly says so. Kraxler (talk) 17:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to at least one of your citations (Faulks and Cooper), the identity of Cagliostro and Balsamo was manufactured by the Inquisition and his enemies in France. Cooper clearly believes that he was NOT Balsamo. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 00:08, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There is consensus among scholars that Cagliostro was Balsamo. Cooper may believe what he wants. "Enemies" in France? Cagliostro was acquitted of any wrongdoing in the Necklace Affair. He got a fair enough trial, so who would be these enemies? Kraxler (talk) 01:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Nonetheless, he was asked to leave France" (from article) - you have to concede, he wasn't popular in some quarters. I don't have an opinion on this personally, but I do think that it ought to be at least mentioned that your sources are not unanimous in accepting the identification of Cagliostro with Balsamo. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 10:40, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The sources are unanimous. Disagreement is possibly voiced by people who make money out of conspiracy theories, or people who swim against the stream on principle. After all, it's easy to disagree and say, no he wasn't Balsamo. But who was he then, does Cooper propose some other identity? To be asked to leave, as a foreigner and being a charlatan (which was, and still is, not forbidden), was common practice at the time, very far-fetched to invoke "enemies" without a name or face, coming frome "some quarters". Kraxler (talk) 15:04, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: At root, Cagliostro = Balsamo comes from the retracted word of a blackmailer, a biography written by a puppet of the inquisition, and Goethe, who visited some people who claimed to be his family, and was nearly parted from a sum of money as a result. Cooper is anything BUT a conspiracy theorist. He spends a great deal of time debunking Templar/Masonic fables. Carlyle was highly dubious about the biography. I do not understand your certainty. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 16:15, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "At root, Cagliostro = Balsamo comes from the retracted word of a blackmailer" ?? At root, Balsamo = Cagliostro comes from a Palermo lawyer, who on official request forwarded documents to the court in Paris. Please note that Cagliostro was the real name of his godfather/greatuncle. Goethe saw a copy of the file which was sent to Paris. So Cooper goes to great lengths to "debunk"? Without a hint of conspiracy theory? Hhmmmm... Kraxler (talk) 22:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

text:  Thing is, I want to know what was significant about this Balsamo that Cagliostro would want to deny the identification?
Sarcasm? Really? 
So, our man's "family" are shown portraits of Cagliostro, and say its Balsamo. The one portrait from the period that is positively identified as Balsamo doesn't look like Cagliostro at all. Cagliostro had a hook nose, Balsamo's turned up. Plastic surgery? This bombshell was not used while Cagliostro was suing two officials for improbable sums of money, or when his open letter to the French people denouncing their government was selling like hot cakes in the streets of Paris (you noted earlier, this did not make him any powerful enemies). We have the word of liar and a swindler against the word of the Inquisition and a duplicitous government whose grateful citizens would shortly put their heads on sticks. If I was a betting man, I'd run a mile. I still do not understand your certainty. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:50, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

text: You mean Cagliostro was photographed, in the 19th century? How odd. Oh, you mean people had to identify sketches or paintings? See here (especially the "Controversies" section) how the same man was depicted by different artists. It's unbelievable. Not much basis for an argument. Kraxler (talk) 01:12, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. This makes the Balsamo family's identification of little Giuseppe from paintings/sketches/prints worthless as evidence, and the documents of the Palermo lawyer (who was probably paid by results) similarly suspect. Discounting the blackmailer, this leaves us with the official Inquisition biography, published in the face of outrage that a celebrity had been condemned to death for practicing Freemasonry. Returning to the original posting, it seems it did not deserve the self-referential dismissal it received. Of two sources for Cagliostro before he came into the public eye, Cagliostro's own account, and that written at the behest of his persecutors, both are likely to be a pack of lies, and probably need separated from the facts of his later life verifiable from third party reports. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Identification worthless, lawyer bribed, Inquisition not trustworthy, blackmailers without leverage, enemies who provide a fair trial in an absolutist regime, no hint by Cooper to Cagliostro's true identity if not Balsamo, and still no hint of conspiracy theory? Really? A historian has to do better than to call the whole world a pack of lies. Sorry, Fiddlersmouth, but give me a link to reliable sources (see WP:RS), or accept the article as it is. Kraxler (talk) 02:04, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Accepted. Thanks for the discussion. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 11:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Article is unclear on to many things 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Alessandro Cagliostro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080908044135/http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/count_cagliostro.html to http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/count_cagliostro.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:36, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Alessandro Cagliostro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080625053508/http://www.nd.edu/~carlyle/cco.pdf to http://www.nd.edu/~carlyle/cco.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified