Jump to content

Talk:Umberto II of Italy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bolinda (talk | contribs) at 05:24, 20 September 2008 (→‎A Question: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconItaly B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Most Commonly used name in English" is not the same thing as "anglicization"

Okay, I've moved the page here. While both names are sometimes used, I've seen Umberto II considerably more frequently than "Humbert II". Argue if you will. john k 22:27, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Oh yes I will. Testing Google, it's clear that "Humbert II of Italy" is more common than "Umberto II of Italy", with 1500 against 904, or almost double. I suggest moving back to Humbert II. --Orzetto 06:57, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But "Umberto II" is much more common than "Hubert II". At any rate, google tests don't tell the whole story. Since you seem to be Italian and are quoting google results as though they are god, I would guess that you probably don't read too much historical literature in English. Perhaps it would be best in such instances to defer to those of us who speak English as a native language and actually read books in English that contain these monarchs' names relatively frequently? john k 14:44, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You post no source. Your argumentation is void, at best it classifies original research. Since Victor Emmanuel's are translated, consistency in style is a better option. Google searches are an acceptable measure when the gap is wider than a few percents. --Orzetto 23:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Airport peerages

I seem to remember a reference to Umberto creating a number of peerages improperly 'on the way to the airport' after the results of the referendum had come in but while he was still king. I cannot source it though, except that it was in the memoirs of a journalist/parliamentarian. m.e. 09:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler, royal wedding

Only in one case, while he was in Germany for a royal wedding, did [Umberto] make an exception, Hitler asked for a meeting.

Besides this being a run-on sentence, couldn't we give actual details here? Whose royal wedding, and, more importantly, when was this? john k 13:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rubbish Homophoby!

"Umberto and Maria José separated in exile; it was indeed an arranged marriage, following a long tradition of royal families, even if some observers alleged that she was really fascinated by her husband, an elegant tombeur de femmes. However, Umberto's sexual interests lay elsewhere, he was a playboy of 'peculiar tastes' (in the words of one royal website) or had an 'inability to distinguish between the sexes' (as another royal biographer put it - a reference to the former king's rumored bisexuality). This knowledge was used by foreign governments hostile to the Savoyard monarchy's survival to ensure the Vatican's opposition to the monarchical cause in the 1946 referendum. Pope Pius XII atoned for this 'failure' by refusing to meet the elected presidents of Italy during his lifetime. Pope John XXIII reversed this policy on his election."

All this is very vulgar; but this is only an example, I'm afraid.

And there are also many ridiculous falsities: for instance, Pius XII did receive the Italian presidents (a photograph of president Gronchi kneeling to receive his blessing was much discussed in the fifties).

Not serious! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.2.155.156 (talk) 01:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm there is rubbish abpit the last king of Italy. Now I will delete the false statment that the pope refused to see the first president of italian repubblic. See [1] User:Lucifero4

Umberto II' homosexuality is anyway confirmed by clear statements, "... mainly by the actress Milly, who said that their relationship was purely platonic, ant that Umberto surrounded himself with 'screen women', and organized things so that at his encounters with these 'splendid' women were present reporters to give to the press the image of a 'gallant and handsome prince'. It is a fake image, as also the files of the Ovra (that is the Mussolini's secret service) demonstrates. Anyway this was his business, that doesn't at all soil his person - he was a worthy, elegant, honnest and caring person with a deep love for his country."

I think you're right. I don't see why homosexuality would soil his personality anyway. It's a bit of an old-fashioned view. In fact, Umberto emerges as a fairly modern man. Contaldo80 (talk) 14:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commenting on English lanuage usage

The incosistancies of how English uses foreign language names, is a wonderment. We use the English Victor Emmanuel, yet the Italian Umberto. Similiar cases - Baudouin of Belgium (instead of Baldwin) and Juan Carlos I of Spain (instead of John Charles I). -- GoodDay (talk) 20:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT?

As I understand it, we have a) Aldrich and Wotherspoon "suggesting" Umberto was gay, b) a smear campaign in the popular press at the time, and c) his enemy collecting information to use for blackmail. None of those qualify as reliable sources, IMO, but are simply rumors. I'm open to hearing otherwise, though. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:08, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bit more substantial than that - it isn't really Aldrich and Wotherspoon (they are simply editors of the book). Enrico Montanari described how he had been courted by Umberto while a young lieutenant in the 1930s (La Lotta di liberazione, quoted in 'Il vizio segreto di Umberto', Extra, March 1971). The biography of Luchino Visconti describes his close relationship with the prince. Bartoli's biography, 'La fine della monarchia, Milan, 1946 describes the 'burden' of the prince's sensual sins - the exact nature of the sins, however, could only be whispered'. The estranged relationship with the queen is told in Bertoldi, L'ultimo re, Milan 1992 as well as Petacco's Regina: la vita e i segreti di maria jose, milan, 1997. These at least seem substantial enough for the start of a debate. I guess I'm not too fussed about the categories thing though - it's a helpful marker for individuals looking to find specific articles of interest, but not essential. Contaldo80 (talk) 14:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Question

I know lots of countries create a "history" of thier king to make them connected with great people in the past even when this isn't true. Did that happen for Umberto II? It says in the article he's connected all the way to the Romans! Even if its true how could they have records for so far back? I don't think its true but I don't want to take it out unless positive.Bolinda (talk) 05:24, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]