Talk:Cicisbeo

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Sociology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Women's History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Cicisbeo appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 31 March 2006. The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the term Cicisbei refers to legal and generally respected companions and often lovers of married women in eighteenth-century Italy? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/March.

What a great word - but how is it pronounced? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.134.6.202 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 23 December 2005

See the article, there's now an IPA version of the word :-) Mstroeck 18:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure whoever wrote the pronunciation doesn't understand the IPA. I would correct it, but I'm not entirely certain of the vowels. embryomystic (talk) 08:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me that the pronunciation is similar to the English/Scots word 'Sissy', being a term for an effeminate male. Are the two connected?

('Titty' was always the UK pet name for 'sister' until this came to have prurient connotations and 'Sissy' took its place there for a short period among the middle classes.) 78.150.243.134 (talk) 01:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the same as a

Now I see that it is [1] XXXVI-XXXVII - Cutler 18:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is! Thank you for pointing it out, that was a regrettable ommission... Mstroeck 18:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating article. The article states:

Customs of the time did not permit them to engage in relationships with any other women during their free time, making the arrangement rather demanding.

Does this includes wives, implying Cicisbeo were always (or mostly) single?-- Singkong2005 02:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Singkong. Thank you, I also think it's pretty interesting. Yes, Cicisbei were mostly single. In fact, many of them led a life of almost complete inactivity apart from the time they spent with their mistress. They often were younger sons of noble houses and by definition had no real place in society at that time. That's something want to make more clear in the article, I just have not gotten around to do it yet. Mstroeck 22:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm almost tempted to make a Wikipedia user box: "This user is available as a Cicisbeo... --Singkong2005 23:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. That would be excellent :-) Mstroeck 23:45, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lovely article! concise and intriguing. just two minor comments:

• the "J.G. Krünitz" external link cannot be accessed, or is it just my computer?
• the section name "General" looks a bit odd to me... perhaps an article of this lovely length doesn't need division of sections at all (except the notes and bibliography).--K.C. Tang 07:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for your comments! The link works for me. There is a link on the page which says "direkt zum Artikel", which means "go directly to the article", and which you have to click. Unfortunately, the website does not seem to allow deep linking directly to articles... And you are of course right, the "General" heading was unnecessary, I removed it. --mstroeck 08:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I can access the link now! btw, would you also start the "petit-maître" article? I don't know what exactly a petit-maître means (a young man who dresses and behaves like a woman?), and why is he comparable to a cicisbeo (Was a petit-maître also employed as lovers by the noblewomen?). want to learn more. Cheers.--K.C. Tang 09:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

forgive my nitpicking, but i've got two more questions:

• should the orthography be cicisbèo? and should the stress fall on the "e"?
• could we have any source for the etymology? some sources say that the word derives from French chiche beau (it sounds rather unlikely to me), but in any case it seems that we cannot be quite sure of the etymology, so it may be good to have a source for that.--K.C. Tang 11:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]