Talk:Maximilian I of Mexico

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

style[edit]

Surely his style when he was born was His Imperial Highness not His Imperial Majesty? STÓD/ÉÍRE 23:53 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

Surely<G>. -- Someone else 00:01 Mar 9, 2003 (UTC)

Removed after Public Domain 1911 encyclopedia entry, as it's been fairly extensively modified by now. -- Infrogmation 01:02 Mar 9, 2003 (UTC)

Who was Tegethoff? -- Zoe

Article name[edit]

I note that this article was recently moved from "Maximilian of Mexico" to "Maximilian I of Mexico". Could the reason please be clearly explained here? I presume it is something relevent to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)? Thanks. Wondering, -- Infrogmation 06:44, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For monarchs who are the only one of their name, the current policy is:

Where there has only been one holder of a specific monarchical name in a state, the ordinal is used only when the ordinal was in official use. For example, Victoria of the United Kingdom, not Victoria I of the United Kingdom; Juan Carlos I of Spain, not Juan Carlos of Spain.

Yes. Like Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia or Hussein I of Jordan or John (not John I) of England.

I proposed this policy some months ago, and there were no objections, so I changed it some months ago. Maximilian, so far as I can gather, did take the ordinal (see [1], which is usually reliable). Thus, the ordinal should be in. john k 13:56, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think in this case Wikipedia naming conventions trump the person's own preferences. I propose to move back. PatGallacher (talk) 15:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It's more than the person's preferences, surely what was used on cyphers, on official texts and in common parlance should be what is used. If a specific point was made for the ordinal, its not something that Wiki should step in on - i thought the guidelines were there for grey areas? Mwheatley1990 (talk) 02:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

About Maximilian's Death[edit]

When Juárez refused to commute Maximilian's death sentence, it wasn't to send a message to the world. The Mexican president didn't commute it because he said that Maximilian's life was out of his hands, and it was now in those of "the law and the people." (I retrieved this from a biography of Juárez by Dennis Wepman)

--Tower Interface 12:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

This is about a theory about Maximilian's death[edit]

I think it was around 2000 or 2001, I don't remember the exact date, but Los Angeles times published a theory about Maximilian's death on it. The writter stated that Benito Juarez had actually let Maximilian go and instead the one who was shot was a look a like, according to the newspaper he left to Central America where he died in poverty, since he couldn't go back to Austria because of political conflicts regarding the trone. Do any of you know about this conspiracy?

Political conflicts regarding the throne? What the hell is that supposed to mean? john k (talk) 23:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

When did he change his name to Craig MacMillan?[edit]

The article mentions his born name (German), but refers to him as Craig Macmillan, an English/Scottish name throughout. When and why did the name change occurr? Zapiens 14:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Craig MacMillan[edit]

What is this Craig MacMillan nonsense? It can't be edited. Can someone please correct this? It's obviously a prank.


PARENTAGE OF MAXIMILIAN

Not everybody accepts the parentage of Maximilian as given in this article. During the period when he was born, there was a close friendship between his mother the Archduchess Sophie and the Duke of Reichstadt, a.k.a. Napoleon II, son of Napoleon Bonaparte. Many have noted the close facial resemblance betwixt Maximilian and Reichstadt, not to mention the fact that the imperial nanny had a habit of referring to Maximilian as "the stepson".

About Maximilian´s death theory[edit]

I have heard about that theory. From what I understand, Juarez shot a look a like and Maximilian escaped and lived for many years in El Salvador by the name of Craig Macmillan. It is said that Craig Macmillan was a tall caucasian man, who always wore white, and was constantly visited by Europeans. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Benval (talkcontribs) 15:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

Parentage?[edit]

There is some evidence that Maximilian was actually the son of the Duke of Reichstadt, the son of the French Emperor Napoleon I, with whom his mother maintained a long relationship. Whether one believes it or not, it ought to be mentioned in the article. Tom129.93.17.139 02:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of parentage, did Maximilian I have any sons or daughters? 71.34.67.135 (talk) 02:21, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The more relevant/likely rumour is that he was the son of Swedish throne pretender prince Gustav of Wasa, son of the late Gustav IV Adolph of Sweden, who was deposed 1809. Maximilian and Franz Josef was nicknamed "die Wasa Buben" by the gossipers of Vienna.--Orakologen (talk) 01:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Post-mortem photo of Maximilian[edit]

If any contributor can use it, then here is a photo of Maximilian after his death. The details are scarce, except the photo was taken quite some time after his death. Post-mortem photo

Fred26 (talk) 11:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

One picture is missing, where he is coming down a ship. It differs from other pictures here, though being meticulous all paintings differ from each other. Where is that other picture stored? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.179.126 (talk) 09:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Career in Austria[edit]

I don't get "His parentage had naturally nothing to do with his success" in that section. The only way to read it is as sarcasm. --Krokodeilaki (talk) 22:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Short Stature[edit]

This makes no sense. Under the reasons for why people think he could have been the son of Napoleon II, it says that he was shorter then his other siblings.Napoleon was average height for his time period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wastedgrunt36 (talkcontribs) 22:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Important: need opinions[edit]

Hi, everyone. I'm planning to start working on this article and take it to FA standard. However, I'm only going to do it in case there is support from all other interested editors. Suggestions, opinions, anything, is appreciated. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 21:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

No one?! --Lecen (talk) 00:22, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I think it is a wonderful idea but as I don't contribute in the English Wikipedia, I won't be very useful! However, I have got two French biographies of Empress Charlotte and some other books about the Royal family of Belgium... So if I can help you in any moment, contact me (in august, because I leave for Canada next week). Good luck ! Konstantinos (82.237.218.242 (talk) 14:10, 2 July 2011 (UTC))
I added an entire new section the article, fully sourced. Also, I debunked this absurd claim that Maximilian was the son of Napoleon II. We can't add rumors and claim they are facts. I'll continue working on this article, albeit very slowly. --Lecen (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Nevertheless, the rumor appears in different biographies. I really think it is only a rumor and I never read a book which accepted it as un real possibility. But it seems that some contemporaries believed it because of the friendship of Napoleon II and Archduchess Sophie. 82.237.218.242 (talk) 13:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Baldness & appearance[edit]

In the lead it reads "Maximilian was prematurely bald, although his portraits showed him with a full head of hair"... Is it just me or does this not belong in the lead? Maybe it is better to create a section "Appearance" with a decription of the Emperor's looks (abobe, there is also talk about his stature, so enough ground for this). In any case, it does not belong in the lead. Pierlot (talk) 16:50, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Indeed is not the place for the lead. I'm goin to adress all issues in time. He started to became bald around his early 30s (like his elder brother), so, I don't believe that can be called "premature". He was very tall, not short as the article says, also. If you want to have an idea of how this article will become once I'm done with it, please, take a look at Pedro II of Brazil. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
In all the images he is on, Maximilian indeed appears to be a tall and slender man. He was the same height as his brother, who towered over 5'8" (1.75m) Elizabeth of Bavaria so that would make Maximilian at least 6'1" (1.85m), quite tall for his era. As for the premature baldness - if it was hereditary and a trait he shared with his brother, father and grandfather then this is another thing that makes Napoleon II's parentage highly unlikely. Success and good luck with the article! Pierlot (talk) 11:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
But the Duke of Reichstadt was a close relative of Maximilian's presumptive father, and himself a grandson of Franz I. So that hardly seems like cllear evidence. john k (talk) 16:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
He was 6'2" as you can see on page 16 of [this book] written by an American who met him. Maximilian had a lot in common with his first cousin, Pedro II of Brazil. --Lecen (talk) 16:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, I certainly notice a clear resemblance in the two men. Seems like a perfectly reliable source, too. Well found! Pierlot (talk) 16:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Napoleon II died at 21 so we will never know if he would have lost his hair at an early age. (92.7.16.72 (talk) 13:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC))

Picture[edit]

Surely there should be a better picture of Maximilian? (92.7.9.176 (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2011 (UTC))

Travels and the Brazilian princess?[edit]

No Brazilian princess is mentioned in this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.206.41.100 (talk) 13:25, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The section, as well as everything else in the article is unfinished. In case you want to know more about the Brazilian Princess, see Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 14:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Images[edit]

Should this article include a reference to Manet's paintings of The Execution of Emperor Maximilian or the photograph in that article? See above. -- 00:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

No photo was taken of the execution. That's a drawing. --Lecen (talk) 00:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

That is not what the French article suggests, but I defer to your superior knowledge. There seems to be a photograph of the firing squad there too, plus some other images in the Spanish and Portuguese versions, including the Manet.

Should any of these images be included here? We already have a somewhat romanticised painting of Maximilian's "last moments", complete with weeping attendants, painted about 15 years later. I was somewhat surprised that the famous paintings by Manet are not already mentioned, if not displayed here. Critics put them in the same category as Picasso's Guernica or Goya's The Third of May 1808. I'll let you decide. -- Theramin (talk) 01:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC) (tweaked)

Yes, but the photo of the firing squad was not taken at the moment he was shot. About yoru earlier question? I see no problem about adding the picture and the link to Manet's painting. I started working on this article but I gave up on the third section. I doubt someone else will finish it. Good luck! --Lecen (talk) 01:15, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

OK. I might add them them. -- Theramin (talk) 01:19, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

From Maximilian to Maximiliano I[edit]

Since his regnal name was actually "Maximiliano I" I wondered if there would be a problem if I change the name of this article to "Maximiliano I of Mexico"? --Lecen (talk) 02:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Bad idea based on OR. all the RS have used Maximilian Rjensen (talk) 07:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
"OR"? Okay, then. Let's leave the article as it is... which isn't good. --Lecen (talk) 11:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
It's not OR, but he is universally referred to as "Maximilian" in virtually all sources in English, which is supposed to be what articles titles are based on. I'm also not sure how rejecting a plan to change the article name to a form not used in English constitutes a preference that the article be left as it is. john k (talk) 23:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I find this sentence[edit]

to be problematic.

" After arriving in Trieste, the coffin was taken to Vienna and placed within the Imperial Crypt, where it can be viewed today, on 18 January 1868."

Should it read, " After arriving in Trieste on 18 January 1868, the coffin was taken to Vienna and placed within the Imperial Crypt, where it can be viewed today." ?
Further, I am uncomfortable with the use of the word, "today" because, well what day is that? However since I am new to this article I think I'll just post this and Watch as to what, if anything, occurs. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Editorial slant[edit]

165.120.157.248 made a number of changes to make the article take a line that basically emphasize Maximilian being invited by Mexican monarchists and de-emphasize the French & Napoleon III. [2] Do you have any sources for this? Not saying the current article is perfect, of course, but while it's certainly true there was an official invitation from Mexicans to Maximilian, my understanding is that it was done at the point of a bayonet - it was a puppet government. So yes, it's technically true, but true in the same way that, say, Joseph Bonaparte became King of Spain a few decades earlier via invitation from that country's nobility. The fact that Maximilian's government lasted only a year or so after the French left also suggests that it was basically a French government, not a particularly well-supported one from Mexicans, for better or worse. SnowFire (talk) 01:25, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

This issue needs to go to the sources. What do the references say on the topics? This is not about what any of us feel about the subject. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 03:25, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
The French had interests in Mexico, this is clear. But it's also true that the Conservartive Party in Mexico backed Maximiliano. Even members of the Liberal Parry supported him and were part of his administration. It was not a "puppet regime". --Lecen (talk) 11:33, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
As always on wikipedia there is room for more than one interpretation, as long as they are properly supported. Carptrash (talk) 17:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Similar titles of article-sections[edit]

  • Re this edit: It is not so much a matter of style (hence covered by the WP:FNNR rule: "Editors may use any section title that they choose.") as it is a matter of clarity. WP:FNNR says that two possible article-sections are "explanatory footnotes" that give information which is too detailed or awkward to be in the body of the article and "citation footnotes" that connect specific material in the article with specific sources. Usually, you can tell which is which by glancing the contents. In "Maximilian I of Mexico", "explanatory footnotes" were called "Endnotes", while "citation footnotes" were called "Footnotes". It was not clear which is which (which section contained "explanatory footnotes" and which section contained "citation footnotes"). --Omnipaedista (talk) 10:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)