Why Galileo? (and not Galilei?)

In My Humble Opinion
1

Subject says it all. We don’t refer to to Isaac (Newton)… so, why is Galileo Galilei always referred to by his first name (I guess assuming that there wasn’t some localised custom of referring to yourself as lastname-firstname in effect - I’m pretty sure I’ve heard names of painters who existed around the time of the renaissance who weren’t referred to by their first names).

2

This thread might answer your question.

3

Thanks Floater, it goes some way to answering it, but I’m still a bit confused as to why we seem to single out Galileo (who had a perfectly good last name he inherited from his father Vincenzo).

For instance, he was at loggerheads with the RC Church over his support for Copernicus’ theory that the earth went round the sun (rather than vice versa); Copernicus preceded Galileo by some years yet we all refer to Copernicus, not Nicholas (his first name). Likewise we refer to Newton, not Isaac.

Maybe there’s no known answer to this…

4

Hmm…

1300s-1600s Italy seemed to have something about some mega-celebs becoming known by just their given names…

Dante Aligheri
Leonardo DaVinci
Michelangelo Buonarotti
Rafael Sanzio(?)
Galileo Galilei

But then, on the other hand,
Niccolo Machiavelli
Giovanni Bocaccio
Ludovico Ariosto

[sub](Though I will acknowledge the possibility that in the latter cases these may not be true family names, but rather cognomina adopted by that particular person)[/sub]

This is not unknown elsewhere, e.g. “Rembrandt Van Rijn(sp?)”

So G. Galilei is not the only person to have this phenomenon applied, though he’s the only major scientist, as opposed to artist/poet I can think of off the top of my head, to have undergone this process.

5

  1. IIRC da Vinci is not a name, It just says that he came from the town of Vinci (and I have no idea about the rest)

  2. His full name is Rembrandt Harmensz. van Rijn (or Ryn, which would have been the spelling in his days / Harmensz. being short for Harmenszoon)

6

However, Buonarotti IS a family name. Generally I think it mostly has to do with the context in which they are discussed and how common the first or last name is. In Italian art history classes, we often have to note Michelangelo Buonarotti as we talk about a number of Michelangelos (Caravaggio, for example-- sorry about all the artist examples). Same goes for Raphael, who in more casual discussions just goes by the first name. In that context (cocktail party, say) he is the only Raphael most people know of and would only be confused with a Ninja Turtle.
This is a different issue than the place-of-origin kind of name, or the popularly used descriptive name (say, Del Sarto, Il Sodoma (can’t even remember his real name), or Rosso Fiorentino, who uses both (‘the red-haired guy from Florence’)). In some circles, “Lucas van Leyden” is just “Lucas”, and everyone knows who you are talking about.
Lots of “family names” started as patronymics and place names and become conventionalised (Anderson, Malevich/ Malenovna, and Harmensz. and van Rijn (a patronymic and place name)), but it seems that this was a process that took centuries.