I never said nor thought that the notion of an united italian nation existed in the middle age. But the idea of Italia as a culturally unified country existed, and the proff is that both dante, machiavelli and petrarca talked about Italia and not of a plurality of italies.
about leonardo, if you dont see that he was the incarnation of the distinctive features of the renaissance man i cant do anything about it. I wont argue with revisionist storiography that keeps tellin us that the middle ages were more progressive than any other time in history.
1) And i've never said the contrary.
2) Culture =/= country. The country of these guys were their cities and they acknowledged this. The common definition of country is "same nation or same state or land defined by many points of parallel.
As instutitionally (theocracy, merchant republics, feudal kingdoms, duchies, feudo-municipal cities, etc.), economically (based on trade, industry, agricultural production), and even linguistically (each dialect of an, acknowledged one italian, was institutionallised a part from each other), Italy was divided.
3)Well, i wait you to give elements saying Leonardo incarnated a rputure with the Middle-Ages. Proove me wrong.
4)Not only i didn't say anywhere that Middle Ages were superior on all way (just saying Renaissance never was a rupture) but you're qualifing me of revisionist because you just don't agree, without giving on valable element?
Well, i won't discuss any longer with your dickhead attitude. Not because we're disagreeing, but because of you going ad hominem.