Talk:Military William Order

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

Unit Award[edit]

On 21 April 2008 unknown contributor with IP address 98.240.46.241 ignored all references at this discussion page and added again that the U.S. 101st Airborne received the Order of William in WW2. Quite arrogantly this person mentioned that however the Order of William website only lists two foreign units, there are others (sic) thus falsely claiming the U.S. 101st Airborne as a foreign recipient of the Orange Lanyard. Please refrain from being ignorant and read what is mentioned on this discussion page. Check the references.


On 3 August 2007 unknown contributor with IP address 194.178.122.86 again added that the U.S. 101st Airborne Division received the Order of William in WW2. This is incorrect. Please read what is mentioned on this discussion page and check the references, see http://www.mindef.nl/binaries/Military%20Order%20of%20William_tcm15-63189.pdf. As a consequence this mistake again has been corrected.


On 1 May 2007 unknown contributor with IP address 67.8.85.101 corrected the English translation of "voor moed, beleid en trouw". He states: <"conspicuous" makes no sense at all and "moed" first and foremost means "courage", even though "bravery" means almost the same>. Awarding the Order of William on 31 May 2006 to the Polish Brigade Her Majesty Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands used the words 'For Conspicuous Bravery, Leadership and Devotion to Duty' in her speech. There is serious doubt that the wording used officially by The Queen make no sense at all, see http://www.koninklijkhuis.nl/content.jsp?objectid=16244. As a consequence the non-improvement has been corrected.


On 15 April 2007 unknown contributor with IP address 134.53.145.47 added again that the U.S. 101st Airborne Division received the Order of William in WW2. Unnecessary to repeat that this is incorrect. Seen the IP address this appears to be the same rather stubborn contributor. Or a person unwilling to read what is mentioned on this discussion page and ignoring the references provided, see http://www.mindef.nl/binaries/Military%20Order%20of%20William_tcm15-63189.pdf. As a consequence this mistake again has been corrected.


On 28 January 2007 unknown contributor with IP address 134.53.145.108 again added that the U.S. 101st Airborne Division received the Order of William in WW2 and that its soldiers were allowed to wear the Orange Lanyard. This is incorrect. Up to 31 May 2006 the 82nd US Airborne Division was the only foreign military unit that received the Order of William. Soldiers of the 82nd US Airborne Division were standing in the guard of honour during the Order of William ceremonies on 31 May 2006 when the Polish 1st Independant Parachute Brigade was awarded the Order of William for gallantry at Arnhem in 1944. Queen Beatrix welcomes in her speech representatives of the 82nd US Airborne Division, see: http://www.koninklijkhuis.nl/content.jsp?objectid=16245. See also http://www.mindef.nl/actueel/nieuws/2005/12/20051209_militairewillemsorde.aspx. As a consequence this mistake has again been corrected.


On 18 September 2006 unknown contributor with IP address 134.53.145.118 added that the U.S. 101st Airborne Division received the Order of William in WW2 and that its soldiers were allowed to wear the Orange Lanyard. This is incorrect, see: http://www.mindef.nl/actueel/nieuws/2005/12/20051209_militairewillemsorde.aspx. As a consequence this mistake has been corrected.


On 13 March 2006 unknown contributor with IP address 132.159.216.113 mentioned that three foreign military units received the Order of William in WW2 and added the U.S. 101st Airborne Division. This is incorrect, see: http://www.ww2awards.com/award/733/non and http://www.mindef.nl/actueel/nieuws/2005/12/20051209_militairewillemsorde.aspx. As a consequence this mistake has been corrected.

Voor Moed, Beleid en Trouw[edit]

I have just given a better translation for "moed"... . It was originally translated as "Conspicuous Bravery". I have no clue where the "conspicuous" part comes from, so it should be left out altogether, and I think a slightly better translation of "moed" is not "bravery" but "courage". However, as is so often the case with translating typically Dutch words into English (a lot of which are not even translatable or are, in some way, "non-words", even though they definitely are not non-words in Dutch because they add to the "mood"), I couldn't think of satisfying translations for "beleid" ("leadership" really doesn't come close... I'd say "prudence" is a much better translation) and "trouw" ("trust" is better, IMO). Addition: "beleid"... I'd say that another Dutch word that comes close to what "beleid" means is "weloverwogenschap"... . But that, of course, is only shifting the problem. I still say "prudence" is a much better translation.


Quote 1: "I have just given a better translation for "moed" ", end of quotation. Here we see a self appointed authority in translations at work. The result is rubbish. Quote 2: "I have no clue where the "conspicuous" part comes from", end of quotation. Indeed, he has no clue. The 'For Conspicuous Bravery, Leadership and Devotion to Duty' is exactly the wording used officially by Her Majesty The Queen in her speech on 31 May 2006, see http://www.koninklijkhuis.nl/content.jsp?objectid=16244.


Well, both/neither of you are/is right. The English version is just a translation of the speech she actually delivered on that day, namely this one: http://www.koninklijkhuis.nl/content.jsp?objectid=16245. You will see that 'voor daden van bijzondere moed en beleid' in the penultimate paragraph is translated as 'for conspicuous bravery, leadership and devotion to duty', and in the last paragraph 'voor Moed, Beleid en Trouw' as 'for acts of conspicuous bravery and leadership'. The first one isn't the official motto (or whatever it's called) of the badge. The second is official in Dutch, but the word 'Trouw' has been omitted in the translation. Adding to this the fact that the word 'beleid' doesn't mean leadership (but either 'policy', or more archaically and relevantly 'prudence', 'careful consideration'), I think it's safe to say that neither can be considered the 'official' translation. Therefore, I see no problem in making our own (better) translation - 'for Courage/Bravery, Prudence/Care and Loyalty'. 84.53.74.196 20:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Jasper May


Quote Jasper May 24 July 2007: "The English version is just a translation of the speech she actually delivered on that day". Incorrect. On 31 May 2006 Her Majesty The Queen spoke in Dutch as well as in English. In her English speech she precisely used the wording 'For Conspicuous Bravery, Leadership and Devotion to Duty'.


Can't there be added some extra information about the translation? Even if it is official, the english translation has not the same meaning as the dutch.

I agree with the comment above. It makes no sense to translate 'beleid' with 'leadership', because 'leadership' in Dutch would be 'leiderschap'. 'Beleid' has different meanings, one of which is 'policy', but all commentaries on this order I've read were talking about it as if it means 'prudence'. 'Beleid' also means something like restraint, moderation, not losing yourself in pillaging and being able to control yourself. It may be that the translation the Queen of the Netherlands used in her speech make it appear it should be translated with 'leiderschap', but that could well be a case of bad translation by the Royal Household, although the context seems to imply that the things she named is not the motto, but instead the qualities the recipient has shown to possess. Qense (talk) 18:53, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Cross of Burgundy[edit]

No much command of English, sorry. The original MWO's 1815 green cross of Burgundy was different to that used nowadays. When was it redesigned?

Well, it was the other way. In the royal decree of 1815 it was originally intended that the design of the badge should be a green Cross of Burgundy between the arms of a white Maltese cross. But due to budget cuts on the jewellery costs early on, or due plain errors by the first jeweller himself, instead a strange sort of flattened and crude feathered St. Andrew's Cross was used. This was technically easier to make and therefore less expensive. Through time the actual design deteriorated and the old model became less and less refined, compared with was originally intended. So in 2000 they decided to change the design to what the founders originally had into mind; instead of a strange caricature of a St. Andrew's Cross, they now use the proper Cross of Burgundy. It is more expensive to produce, but more in line with the description in the royal decree for the order. Personally, I like the 2000 model, it is qua design and technically much more enhanced. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 03:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello once again. The fact is that there are precedents for that crude cross of Burgundy (in fact it looks like 2 leeks crossed in diagonal!): for instance the coinage from the Spanish and Austrian Low Countries. Needless to say, anyway, that the new design is more true to what a cross of Burgundy proper has to look like. Thanks a lot for your explanation, Mr. Mophon. I like the 2000 model too.
Austrian coins, mint of Milan, 18th century_"http://numismatica-italiana.lamoneta.it/riepilogo/SW-33" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.85.148.202 (talk) 09:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't realize that those words meant those things, it was on one of my shirts and I just wanted to know what it meant, interesting ~ SaMaNtHa13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaMaNtHa13 (talkcontribs) 18:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)