Jump to content

Talk:Charles, Cardinal de Bourbon (born 1523)

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

Mistake

[edit]

The taxt says Henri III the king of Navarre but should read Henri IV RayParis13 (talk) 08:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect, he ruled Navarre as Henri III, and France as Henri IV Sovietblobfish (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also can we use Henri then Henry? RayParis13 (talk) 08:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UE

[edit]

Hi @Ecrm87:.

I see you recently reverted my manual reversion of the article to its original form on grounds of WP:UE. I confess I don't really understand the purpose of this, the names used are all widely present in English historiography (indeed both my English and French language biographies of Henri IV refer to him with that spelling (Pitts and Babelon), and François is not an uncommonly used name, either in the books used by me to write this article or in the English lexicon.

'Ligue' is a slightly more obscure term, but again, it is the way the 'Catholic League' is referred to in my English source (Sutherland), and moreover the first time it is used it is done with a link to the article.

By reverting the edit there is now greater cause for confusion in this article due to the inconsistencies of spelling it produces throughout the body, moreover it means that we are left with situations where people who are obscure enough to never have been 'anglicised' in the Anglophone world (such as the Cardinal's mother Françoise d'Alençon) are left intact, but other people are switched from François to Francis. It seems far more logical to me to just leave them all as François/Françoise. sovietblobfish (talk) 13:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sovietblobfish:

I agree with you that the French names are present in English historiography, however what WP:UE is for is to create a standard of consistency across wikipedia, not just on one page. This is why the article title for Henri III is Henry III of France, therefore we have to follow this. Françoise d'Alençon's page is under her French name which is therefore acceptable to use in the French form in-article. I know it's perhaps not the best logically, but it does create a certain consistency for editors to follow.

Furthermore, adding French names to English links unnecessarily lengthens the link per WP:NOPIPE, another reason to stick with the English names.

I'm happy to run through the article again to try and improve the spellings, but it seems you know more about the subject than I. Specifically with regard to the Ligue my feeling is to say: Ligue (Catholic League) to explain and then use Catholic League or League thereafter. The same with Liguer, etc. Ecrm87 (talk) 15:02, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
My thanks for this thoughtful reply. I didn't realise I was piping French names to English links, I thought I was doing it like this [Henri III of France|Henri III].
To be honest, I would imagine a majority of the content concerning Henri on Wikipedia at this point refers to him in the French fashion, therefore perhaps it is his biography we need to alter, but as far as this article is concerned I will leave it in your capable hands.
sovietblobfish (talk) 15:10, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 March 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Moved to proposed alternative proposal. (non-admin closure) Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 12:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charles I, Cardinal de Bourbon → Charles I de Bourbon (archbishop of Rouen) – There is a lot of intersection between the names Charles, the house of Bourbon and the title of cardinal. See Cardinal of Bourbon and Charles de Bourbon. The current title is confusing because this fellow was not the first cardinal of the House of Bourbon named Charles. He was the first Charles to be archbishop of Rouen. The title I propose follows the French Wikipedia. Srnec (talk) 22:47, 2 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Natg 19 (talk) 17:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 17:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Per WP:COMMONNAME. When discussed in historical literature, he is always identified, be it in English or French texts as the cardinal de/of Bourbon. I've never seen him referred to by his archbishopric.
I would forward a counter proposal that I made on the talk page of his nephew in favour of Charles de Bourbon, cardinal de/of Bourbon (1523-1590) and Charles de Bourbon, cardinal de/of Bourbon (1562-1594) sovietblobfish (talk) 23:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would accept Charles, Cardinal de Bourbon (1523–1590) and Charles, Cardinal de Bourbon (1562–1594) as titles. Srnec (talk) 23:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This would be perfect I think :) sovietblobfish (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, This is an unfortunate situation, but I don't think dates are good in titles, particularly since they're so close. The nephew was more generally known as the "Cardinal de Vendôme" during his uncle's lifetime (when he was most relevant, and when there is more writing about his activities), so "Cardinal de Bourbon-Vendôme" might be a more recognizable option for the nephew. Unfortunately, the uncle had also been "Cardinal de Vendome" earlier and is also referred to as that for a spell. A resolution I have sometimes seen in writing is distinguishing them as "Cardinal de Bourbon" (uncle) and "Cardinal de Bourbon-Condé" (nephew), which is a clearer and more natural difference than dates. Walrasiad (talk) 02:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't see I have ever seen the younger cardinal referred to as Bourbon-Condé in the secondary literature. Every book I have read and index I have perused refers to the uncle as cardinal de Bourbon, and the nephew as firstl cardinal de Vendôme, then on the death of his uncle it swithces to cardinal de Bourbon. This is why I think dates are the only path forward. 08:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC) sovietblobfish (talk) 08:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. I'm not coming up with many Bourbon-Conde in secondary either. That said, I'd still prefer "Cardinal de Vendôme" or "Cardinal of Bourbon-Vendôme" over dates. That is commonly used for differentiation in secondary sources. Walrasiad (talk) 10:15, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it was a choice between those two, my preference would be for 'cardinal de Vendôme' as this is indeed the title he held for the majority of his adult life whereas cardinal of Bourbon-Vendôme refers to a cardinalate that did not exist. However my ultimate preference remains dates as it maintains both parties by the title they would ultimately enjoy. sovietblobfish (talk) 11:22, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh also, even if the younger cardinal was changed to cardinal de Vendôme that doesn't solve the problem of this particular article we are on the talk page of as the uncle is definitely the cardinal de Bourbon in all secondary literature, yet Srnec's contention is this confuses things with Charles II, Duke of Bourbon. sovietblobfish (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would accept Charles, Cardinal de Bourbon (uncle) and Charles, Cardinal de Bourbon (nephew) as titles, although my preference would be for dates. Other possible titles include Charles X, Cardinal de Bourbon for this guy and Charles, Cardinal de Vendôme or Charles II, Cardinal de Bourbon-Vendôme for his nephew. (The I-II-III numbering for Charles de Bourbon seems really to relate to the archbishopric of Rouen.) "Charles X" is actually quite common, although it relates to only a small part of his life. Srnec (talk) 16:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding was that pretenders who were never in power aren't given regnal numbering in article titles? sovietblobfish (talk) 17:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My issue with the (uncle) and (nephew) system is that it puts the two articles in a bubble.
The uncle was also a nephew to Francis de Bourbon, Count of St. Pol, and the nephew was also an uncle to Henri II, Prince of Condé. What meaning does it have to the general reader who encounters one of the two articles in isolation to know that the person was an uncle or a nephew? My first question on encountering that would be 'whose nephew'. sovietblobfish (talk) 17:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, "cardinalates" aren't real titles - they use fabricated family names. There is a real cardinal "title" (titulus) - named after a titular church in Rome, but nobody uses that (except on highly formal occasions). When you get a cardinal's hat, you get the titular church in Rome, and nothing more. So unlike bishops, cardinals are not attached to any domain or location in France. How you are referred to is up to you, but typically you use your family surname, and are referred to as that (e.g. if Emmanuel Macron becomes a cardinal, he is "Cardinal de Macron").
By the custom of the French nobility, your surname is the highest available estate in your family. A French noble family has a bunch of noble titles available, typically a senior one (Duke of Bourbon) for the eldest, and bunch of junior marquisates, comtes, vicomtes, seigneurs, which they distribute to younger children when needed. If these are all used up, and you still have children left over, then you fabricate a new one from scratch (e.g. pick one of your farms, villages or castles and name your kid after it, "Comte de Chateau X"). The Bourbon family had a ton of estates (and thus titles) available, the highest being Duke of Bourbon, the next was Vendome, Conde, Enghien, Soissons, etc. Some titles were retained by the elder branch, others spun off into junior branches. But when the eldest one dies, the others move up one step - Vendome becomes Bourbon, etc.
As cardinalates only provide status and not any specific estate, the receiver follows his noble family's surname pattern by courtesy. The most senior ecclesiastic was "Cardinal de Bourbon" (parallel to Duke), the next was "Cardinal de Vendome" (parallel to Count), etc. Unlike bishoprics, these are not actual domains these guys held, but just how they are referred to by others as an acknowledgement of their rank in the family.
He was "Cardinal de Vendome" so long as there was a living elder cardinal in the family (the Cardinal de Bourbon). He doesn't actually "get" anything new with the death of his uncle. He just becomes the most senior ecclesiastic, and so has the senior courtesy of "Cardinal de Bourbon".
So I think we have some leeway here. We are not French aristocrats, and are not particularly obliged to refer to them by the courtesy patterns of the Bourbon family, but can follow WP:COMMONNAME. Walrasiad (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While I still have hopes for Cardinal de Vendome for the nephew, I think your suggestion of using only birth dates is certainly an improvement over the earlier full dates proposal. I would not object, if others find that preferable. I do want to get rid of that "Charles I" ordinal thing. That's just confusing. Walrasiad (talk) 15:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy for this to come to pass. As good a proposal as my initial one I feel. sovietblobfish (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me, although I still do not understand the aversion to full dates on this project. Ping for @UmbrellaTheLeef: Srnec (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: Relisting for clearer consensus on the alternate proposal. BD2412 T 17:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Charles,_Cardinal_de_Bourbon_(born_1523)&oldid=1226557789"