Talk:Philippa of Hainault

jeanne (talk) 11:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Afrocentrism in a spoof of the BBC?

This is completely rediculous! IP Address 20:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Philippa and Neville's Cross.

This is a myth: Queen Philippa was not at Neville's Cross, and never exercised any kind of military command. The army that defeated David II was commanded by William de la Zouche, Archbishop of York. Rcpaterson 07:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

7th Greatest Black Briton?

This is interesting, but where is the evidence that she was black? Were there even any black people in her ancestry? --Stewcarr 13:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

There is very little proof of the fact. According to the ODNB the description by Bishop Stapeldon with some stereotypical black features may not even be about her but about one of her sisters. Any black ancestry would probably suggest a bastard somewhere in the linage and would be something to keep quiet about. Just bringing the idea at that time would probably be regarded as treason. MeltBanana 15:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

This is truly ridiculous! Why is Philippa a 'great' Black Briton? Because her son was called the Black Prince. Why was he so called? Because he wore dark armour!!!!! Thus the absurdity of all political correctness. Rcpaterson 00:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The suggestion is of course ridiculous. "Black", "Red" and "Fair" are usually references to hair colour, and in medieval Europe never a reference to skin colour. Trade and contact with sub-saharan Africa was so sporadic and so extremely indirect, that the number of black people who set foot in medieval France or England could probably be counted on one hand. Just to reassure the clueless, there is no debate amongst historians about the "blackness" of this queen or the son of Edward III. Seems to be a product of that website, or at least its badly informed source. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 00:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

There's no need to get overheated. Black ancestry did occasionally occur in past times: the next Duke of Westminster will have a black ancestor through his mother, descended from Pushkin whose great-grandfather was Gannibal, Peter's black military man. And I believe I read somewhere that Philippa may have had Moorish (as opposed to "blackamoor") ancestry. Truth can often be stranger than fiction.

Kneeslasher 11:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

This issue has been pretty well hashed out in the discussion portion of Edward, the Black Prince. It is under the discussion subject "Edward the Black Prince." I have corrected a link in the article of Philippa of Hainault regarding her parentage. The link referring to her father, William I, Count of Hainault, was linked to the page of William I, Duke of Bavaria, who was actually her nephew. William I, Duke of Bavaria was the son of Philippa of Hainault's sister, Margaret, Countess of Hainaut. There is also an incorrect link on Margaret, Countess of Hainaut's page stating her son is actually her father, so I will correct that also.

If you look at Philippa of Hainault's parentage, you will find nary a link to a Moor. If you follow the links to the pages of her ancestors you will find Dutch, ... you know what, I give up!!! I am finding links to William I, Duke of Bavaria everywhere!! William I, Duke of Bavaria is also listed as the son of John II, Count of Holland, who died 26 years before William I, Duke of Bavaria was born, so I guess he is his own grandpa, in addition to being his mother's father.

The only evidence I can find that Philippa of Hainault was dark is to look at the painting of her son, John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster, who appears quite dark.

A more interesting link to "darkness" in the lineage of Edward, the Black Prince is his great-grandmother Joan I of Navarre, who is said to have had "Arabic" features. Joan I of Navarre was the mother of Isabella of France, who was said to have inherited the blond hair of her father, Philip IV of France, and the "Arabic" features of her mother. Isabella of France was Edward, the Black Prince 's grandmother. Navarre is what is now the Basque region of Northern Spain. The cite for the facial features of Joan I of Navarre and Isabella of France is Isabella and the Strange Death of Edward II (2003) by Paul Doherty, page 11.

Jsternsp 09:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, it's all good now. I think I put William I, Duke of Bavaria in his proper place. Checking the ancestry of Philippa of Hainault is now easier. The closest I can come in her ancestry to a Moorish connection is Baldwin I of Constantinople , (July 1172 – 1205), the first emperor of the Latin Empire of Constantinople, born in Bulgaria of parents of Dutch/French extraction. His father was Baldwin V, Count of Hainaut . His mother was Margaret I, Countess of Flanders . It looks like Philippa had a Dutch, Belgian, French, German thing going on, not Moorish.

Jsternsp 10:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Another way to find out if something was so is to see what their enemies would say. England had a lot of enemies, Scotland and France. So if Edward III’s wife was suspected of being illegitimate or if she was significantly dark to make that accusation, then enemies of Edward III in Scotland or France would have made something of it. But they didn’t. Chwyatt 08:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Philippa had Western Asian blood from her ancestor Khan of the Cumens.Asia is not Africa.Why not just say she was half Cherokee and make her a cousin of Pocahontas?Black Briton indeed!She was neither black nor British.She was A white Fleming.jeanne (talk) 18:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Chiming in almost fourteen years later: Today I hastily used RedWarn's vandalism button to revert this addition by BourgeoisPanda:

• In 2003, she was voted as 5th on the list of 100 Great Black Britons. However, the decision to include her on the list has been criticized, with many historians noting that there was no evidence that suggested Philippa has any African ancestry.

After taking a second look, I realized that the edit might not have been the joke it had appeared to be. When I went to make not of this, I saw that GrindtXX had already undone my revert. I suppose the WP article on the list ranking black Britons counts as substantiation of the first sentence, but I would think both the first and the second might want some sourcing. The WP article provides no source supporting Philippa's inclusion on the list, which may be standard procedure in the presentation of such rankings; I wouldn't know. It does provide two sources refuting "black" ancestry. Does anyone else think the above statements could use some sourcing? Eric ^talk 15:33, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

ARMENIAN ANCESTRY

Oh for goodness sake. She wasn't black nor African. Phillipa had Armenian ancestry on her dad's side. She was a descendant of the Armenian Princess Morphia of Melitene, her 'dark' coloring is from her Armenian ancestry given Armenians are usually darker/olive complexion in coloring then your typical fair coloring English person. (Angar432 (talk) 02:10, 26 August 2010 (UTC))

She also had Cuman ancestry on her mother's side. Seeing as the Cumans originated from Central Asia, she would have most likely had slightly Asiatic features and colouring.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:12, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Picture

The picture of Philippa in the article is highly fanciful and romanticised and I don't beleieve it is suitable for an encylopeda article. Compare it with this image held by the National Portrait Gallery: http://www.npg.org.uk/live/search/portrait.asp?search=ss&sText=hainault&LinkID=mp03536&rNo=1&role=sit

Grant | Talk 15:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

The front image is the best know stylised version of her, even if it was made by someone who clearly had no real idea what she looked like. The National Portrait Gallery image was also made several hundred years after her, again by someone who had no real idea what she looked like. The only thing either artist would have to go on is her tomb effigy, which was commissioned in her life time, and neither engraving looks like, although the National Portrait Gallery image is closer, imo. Chwyatt 08:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

A joke, surely

The suggestion that Philippa was visibly African in appearance, that is. Her ancestry is known for many generations back, and there is no trace of African in it. Her father had several daughters for the later Edward III to choose from, and it is fairly well attested that while for reasons of alliance he had to pick one of them, Philippa he found personally sympathetic and she was his preference. If there had been doubts about her parentage, or if she had been of what at the time would certainly have been seen as a peculiar appearance, he would have been warned off her and directed to another daughter (he was only 13 at the time, and firmly under his mother's tutelage).

Nevertheless, since others have raised these concerns before and let what I can only see as an absurdity stand, I will do the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.188.54 (talk) 08:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Elizabeth of Bosnia

According to Wikipedia's own page on Elizabeth of Bosnia, she was not "a daughter of the Khan of the Cumens and his wife, Galicie of Halicz". Rootsweb is not a reliable source because anyone can create a database and fill it with whatever they please. I will revert the edits by Jeanne Boleyn. Jugbo (talk) 01:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The Elisabeth of Bosnia in Wikipedia is a different Elisabeth.Phiippa's ancestor lived a hundred years earlier and can be verified by Leo Van de Pas and Brigitte Gastel.As for her birthdate, I got that from Debrett's book on the British royals.I suggest you do a better job of researching people and not be so quick to revert the edits of another just because of a similar name in Wikipedia.Surely, even a cursory knowledge of history shows that many royal personages bear the same names,thus creating confusion.Seeing as I justified my insertion of Elisabeth as a proven ancestor of Philippa's,I waste no time in putting her back.jeanne (talk) 14:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I just had a look at Wikipedia.Maria of Hungary(born 1257) is listed as the daughter of Elisabeth the Cumen, daughter of Kuthen.jeanne (talk) 14:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I see what happened. I followed Philippa's ancestry according to the links on each successive page: Jeanne of Valois, and then Marguerite of Anjou and Maine, which incorrectly linked (I've corrected it) to Mary of Hungary (who obviously couldn't have been her mother - I just didn't catch the date dicrepancy before). Sorry. Jugbo (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The link to Mary of Hungary is correct,Jugbo.You are forgetting that princesses were often wedded at 12 years of age!!Let's go back step-by-step.Philippa born:1311; her mother Jeanne de Valois born:1294;her grandmother, Marguerite d'Anjou born:1273 ;her great-grandmother,Mary of Hungary born:1257;her great-great-grandmother-Elisabeth of Bosnia born:1240/41.The dates do seem very close, but not when you18:28, 10 April 2008 (UTC)jeanne (talk) take into account the extreme youth of the royal brides.I acquired this geneaology for Philippa about 10 years ago, so that was why I was eager to place it in Wikipedia.Another thing which is interesting is that the modern Romanians are descendants of the Eurasian Cumens; hence the surnames Comaneci, etc.18:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)jeanne (talk)

I know the link is correct, that's because I corrected it. Jugbo (talk) 20:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Jugbo, now it's perfectly comprehensible; without the links,there is confusion.Wikipedia has an interesting article on Kuthen,jeanne (talk) 05:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC) as well as his daughter,Elisabeth.

The Elizabeth you were searching is Elizabeth the Cuman, daughter of Köten. Her daughter is under Maria of Hungary (1257-1323). Her granddaughter under Marguerite of Anjou and Maine. Her great-granddaughter under Joan of Valois (1294-1352). Her fourth-generation descendant is covered in this article. The lineage is not exactly a new subject for Wikipedia.

Where did you find the information on the maternal ancestry of Elizabeth? Most genealogies have it as uncertainDimadick (talk) 11:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Leo van de Pas lists her as NN Galicie;RootsWeb.com gives her full name as Galicie of Halicz and even lists her father, who appears to be Russian.I have seen her listed as a princess of Halicz in other web sites.jeanne (talk) 18:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)::ok now I've got her father's name.This is from Roots.web.com.His name was Rurikide "MSTISLAW" Jaroslawitsch,Prince de Halicz.He died in 1228 which means his daughter(Elizabeth's mother )was born before 1228.Elizabeth died in 1290.Kuthen(her dad) was born in 1210.I hope I've explained it well.jeanne (talk) 18:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

"Elizabeth of Bosnia brought Asian blood into the English royal line"?! Do you even know where the Kingdom of Bosnia was? Bosnia and Herzegovina is a country on the Balkan peninsula of Southern Europe! Surtsicna (talk) 20:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

A few points:

1. It's interesting that "Galicia" (Galicie) is the Latinized form of the Slavic name of the region of "Halych" (Halicz). Perhaps her name is really something other than "Galicie", and there's been a misunderstanding somewhere.
2. The only Mstislav on Wikipedia who died in 1228 is Mstislav Mstislavich, whose article states that he married "a daughter of Kypchak Khan Kotian". The only sons-in-law of his that are mentioned are Danylo of Halych and Yaroslav of Vladimir. Perhaps this is the maternal grandfather of Elizabeth that your talking about and his page just omits (as so many do) some relevant information?
3. However, if this is her grandfather, unless there's a mistake somewhere (on Wikipedia or Rootsweb), then it would mean that Köten was her father as well as her great-grandfather (and unless it's a different Köten. I'm the one who added the link, by the way, and I can revert it if I'm wrong). Maybe I'm missing something. Jugbo (talk) 01:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Before I reply to Jugbo with pertinent info regarding Galicie and Kuthen,I wish to reply to the person by the name of Surtsicna who had the temerity to insult MY intelligence by asking me if I knew where Bosnia was? Apart from the fact that geography and history were my best subjects in school; I currently reside in Italy,which faces the Balkans(on the Adriatic side.Surtsicna, you have heard of Italy,I presume?!If you will read the linked article to Kuthen,you will see that the Cumens were of Turkic-Mongol origin.If you think there's no Western Asian blood in Europe how did the blood group B Type get here?It originated in ASIA and I possess it even though I'm mainly Irish.Surtsicna,you need to study your history.jeanne (talk) 05:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Jugbo, yesterday, I found an excellent French geneaological site which has a list of sources.Ok, now while it is a family geneaology(It's called Genealogie Famille de Carné by Alain Carné)I've no doubt as to it's veracity.Elizabeth's mother was known as Galcie de Halicz because her father was Rurikide "Mstislaw" Jaroslawitsch,Prince de Halicz Galicie is doubtless as you point out the Latinised version of Halicz.He died in 1228 so that would put"Galicie's birth before that year.Alas, I still cannot obtain her mother's name but I presume her to have been Russian or Slavic as well.Rurikide's parents were Yaroslav Rurikide and a Princess Przemyside (first name unknown) who was the daughter of Vladislav Przemyside,King of Bohemia and his wife,Gertrude de Babenberg).Yaroslav was the son of Rurikide Mstislavovitch,Grand Duke of Kiev and his wife, Ljubava Hohenstauffen.Now, let's get back to Kuthen .He was born around 1210 and his father was Suthoi of the Cumens(1190-March 1241 battle)He was the son of Kotian, Khan of Polovtsiens(1170-march 1240 in battle)The lines can be traced even farther back.Unfortunately,I couldn't continue my research last night.But the Halicz lines goes all the way back to the Holy Roman Emperors!Hope this cleared up the confusion Jugbo.At least we discovered who Koten/Kotian was !!jeanne (talk) 05:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I just had a look at the unsourced article on Mstislaw.It is confusing and full of contadictions. It also is unsourced.I think author had him mixed up with another. Also before you get confused again_there were TWO Gertrude de Babenbergs!!!And both of them married Yaroslavs!! The Gertrude I am referring to was the half-sister of Conrad III of Germany of the Swabian dynasty.The dates all fit.Dont confuse her with the later (13th contury Gertrude-they are two different women)jeanne (talk) 06:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

But you just named the maternal grandparents of Elizabeth's maternal grandfather as Gertrude of Babenberg and Vladislav, whose son was named Yaroslav. I found this page. Are these the people? Jugbo (talk) 08:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Something's off somewhere because as these pages stand:

1. Köten is both the father and great-grandfather of Elizabeth.
2. Mstislav is both the son-in-law as well as the father-in-law of Köten.

I'm aware that it's possible, but I think it's pretty unlikely. Jugbo (talk) 08:16, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

The biological aspect is possible, at least. Not the marital part. Jugbo (talk) 08:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

unless someone's a polygamist. Jugbo (talk) 08:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

or maybe not. I don't know. It's 3:24 am for me. Jugbo (talk) 08:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

It's the repetion of names that's creating this confusion.Check out what I have wriiten above:Kuthen (elizabeth's dad),Suthoi (her grandad) Kotian( hergreat-grandfather!)08:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)jeanne (talk)Also both Suthoi and Kotian died at the same battle!Kuthen was also assassinated the following year- 1241!More confusion.

The name "Kotian" is used in the Mstislav article as the name of Mstislav's father-in-law, and Köten's article states that Mstislav is his son-in-law. So "Kotian" is being used to refer to "Köten". Jugbo (talk) 08:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I realise that Kuthen and Kotia/Koten are same names but that article on Mstislav isn't sourced.Kuthen (father of Elizabeth was married to the daughter of Rurikide" Mstislav" Jaroslawitsch,Prince de Halicz.Has the author of article been queried as to his referances?jeanne (talk) 09:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ezhiki is the one who originally added the information about "Kotian". Jugbo (talk) 09:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo is quite knowledgeable about Russian and Eastern European history and royalty. You might ask him about it as well. Jugbo (talk) 09:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Just had a thought.Could Mstislav and Kuthen have had complicated marital ties between them?Galicie could have been his daughter from a later marriage.I wll ask the two users you noted.Thank you.jeanne (talk) 11:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I've figured it out now.Galicie(mother of Elizabeth) was the GRANDDAUGHTER, not daughter of Mstislav.Her mother was his daughter!!Now it's falling into place.I've asked Ezhiki for help-am waiting for his reply.But jeanne (talk) 13:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)this makes sense.Kuthen and "Galicie" were cousins, hence the confusion.

I guess you're taking the "Kotian" in the Mstislav article to refer to Köten's grandfather?

So if "Galicie" was Mstislav's granddaughter, then that would make her great-grandfather Köten's grandfather. However, the Köten article refers to Mstislav's page after describing him as a son-in-law. Therefore, the "Kotian" in the Mstislav article must be Köten.

If "Galicie" was Mstislav's granddaughter, then that would mean that Köten was Elizabeth's father and now her great-great-grandfather as well (rather than just her great-grandfather, if it's correct that Mstislav was Köten's son-in-law).

So the relationship between Mstislav and Elizabeth's mother remains to be determined, and the relationship between Köten and Mstislav remains to be decided upon. Jugbo (talk) 18:52, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm inclined to believe Mstislav was Elizabeth's mother's grandfather rather than father as I originally thought;just by re-reading the articles on Mstislav and Kuthen.I also read in one database that one of the women(mother or grandmother?)was named Erzebet (makes sense) but I am still waiting on info from Ezhiki.What has been proved is an ancestral link between thejeanne (talk) 10:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC) English royal family and the early Russians.It's obvious Elizabeth's mother was a Russian De Halicz, we just need to determine her tie to Mstislav.

Hey, Jeanne - have you noticed that Ezhiki responded to your question? If I were you, I'd try either his suggestion, or asking Ghirlandajo about it. Jugbo (talk) 04:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Jugbo,I am waiting for Ghirladajo's reply.I just asked the Russian Notice Board.I came upon an excellent site called "Medieval Lands" and they list Mstislav.It appears he had a daughter named Anna who married a Yaroslav.I am inclined to believe Anna and Yaroslav were the parents of "Erzebet" de Halicz who married Kuthen (who was her cousin).Mstislav was married to a daughter of Kuthen,but the dates would make him the first Kuthen(grandfather of the second Kuthen)Alot of confusion but a link needs to be provided between Mstislav and "Galicie" de Halicz.jeanne (talk) 06:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Mstislav's page mentions a daughter named Anna married to Danylo of Halych; and also states that he "married his own daughter to Yaroslav of Vladimir", as Yaroslav's second wife, named on that page as "Rostislava Mstislava", whose "maternal grandfather was Kotian Khan." Apparently, they divorced after two years - no offspring mentioned. The Medieval Lands page (which is in the external links section of Yaroslav's page) corroborates this - Anna married Daniil, and Rostislava married Yaroslav (do a word search for "Udaloy" to get the right Mstislav). I would be inclined to believe that "Galicie" and "Erzebet" (Elizabeth) were descended from Anna and Daniil, because Daniil was a ruler "of Halicz". Jugbo (talk) 08:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense Jugbo.In fact, it's the most logical connection so far.Also Elizabeth of Bosnia named one of her daughters Anna.

Just had another look at Medieval Lands,Daniil married Anna in 1218,all his children are listed.None said to have married Kuthen.Now Rostislava married Yaroslav in 1214 but were divorced in 1216,no offspring listed but...what if she had a girl(Galicie/Erzebet)in 1215.Yaroslav divorced her the following year (perhaps she was unable to bear further children-meaning sons)?1215 fits as the birth of Galicie, seeing as Eizabeth of Bosnia was born 1239/1240.If a daughter of Anna married Kuthen she'd have to have been born 1219 or later.that's ok datewise but why isn't she accounted for?jeanne (talk) 14:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Section a mess

The entire Life section of the article is a complete mess. It really needs to be improved and brought up to Wikipedia standards. At the moment the prose looks awful and the section contains nothing but quotes and descriptions.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:09, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I have improved the article somewhat and have broken the Life section into two sections; however, there needs to be more biography on her.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 10:21, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Regent

Exactly when was she regent? In which years?--85.226.45.47 (talk) 23:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Issue with the issue

The Issue section seems confusing. It says there were 14 children; but lists 12 of them and adds "Another three sons and two daughters died in infancy". I make that 17 children in all. Astronaut (talk) 14:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. According to Charles Cawley, Philippa had 13 known children. I have since made the necessary correction.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Hainaut or Hainault?

The modern French (Belgian) spelling is Hainaut; the more archaic spelling is Hainault. However, in English-language sources, the county (and Philippa in particular) are almost always spelt Hainault. I've compromised by changing" all references to Philippa to Hainault, but leaving references to the county as Hainaut. It's not ideal, so if anyone wants to improve on it, please do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrindtXX (talk • contribs) 15:40, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Years of regency

The article states that she was regent in England during the absence of her spouse. Exactly which years was she regent? Should it not be written in the article? It is highly relevant facts.--85.226.41.14 (talk) 18:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Date of coronation

@Edouard2:, please stop changing her coronation date to 18 February 1330 without explanation, discussion or sources. (I see you virtually never provide edit summaries. PLEASE LEARN TO DO SO. It takes seconds, and is an act of basic courtesy to other editors.) We have a citation of a reliable source – Juliet Vale in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography – saying that "it was ... on 25 February 1330 that Philippa was crowned in Westminster Abbey". The article in the old Dictionary of National Biography by William Hunt (published 1895) – see wikisource – says "She was crowned at Westminster on 4 March 1330". The difference between Old Style and New Style dates in the 14th century would have been 7 days (and there is 7 days between 18 Feb and 25 Feb, and again between 25 Feb and 4 March). It may be, therefore, that Vale was using the Old Style (Julian) calendar in use at the time, whereas Hunt converted his date to the New Style (Gregorian) calendar. Alternatively, it may be that Vale was using New Style, and you have a source that uses Old Style: if so, please tell us what it is. Or the explanation may be something else entirely. But we will get nowhere if you won't explain yourself. For now, I am reverting to 25 February, as we have a reliable modern source that explicitly says that. GrindtXX (talk) 20:11, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Be polite and look at my sources, you vulgar person... --Edouard2 (talk) 09:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Besides, you are really hysterical --Edouard2 (talk) 09:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

No human being should ever be spoken like you've spoken to me. Bear that in mind ! --Edouard2 (talk) 09:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Philippa of Hainault/Hainaut

The recent move of this article from "Philippa of Hainault" to "Philippa of Hainaut", made by No such user at the instigation of Andrew Lancaster as an "uncontroversial technical request" on the grounds that it "seems to be an old misunderstanding", should not have been undertaken without prior discussion on this page. I for one find it highly controversial. Yes "Hainaut" is the modern Belgian/French spelling for the medieval county and the modern province, while "Hainault" is an archaic form; but in English-language medieval historiography, and particularly with regard to Philippa, it remains the form almost invariably used. It is the form used in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography article on Philippa (2004/2010); in a full-length biography by Kathryn Warner published in 2019; and in countless other scholarly and popular sources. A search on Google for "Philippa of Hainault" gives me 90,200 hits; a search for "Philippa of Hainaut" gives me 8,890 hits. This move should be reverted immediately. GrindtXX (talk) 14:56, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't have a strong view on this, though I imagine I might if I were more familiar with writings on Philippa. In any case, here's a Google ngram comparison, FYI. Eric ^talk 16:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Prefer Hainaut (NO L), but happy to compromise. I did not realize the move could possibly be controversial. It was clearly raised on the talk page in the past (not by me) and no one disagreed? My apologies. With the new information my proposal would be to give a bit of time to get feedback from more people, so that we can get a long lasting resolution. I personally still dare to prefer Hainaut because 1. It is widely accepted on WP that we use modern placenames in the local language. I do think that's a good principle. 2. I do not think it is like John of Gaunt's name because his byname is far more famous. We are only talking about a silent L here. I see this as a placename, and therefore we can at least arguably say that the L is simply a mistake. 3. I strongly suspect that google is simply being biased by the large number of old books we can search as opposed to newer works. I think modern historians tend to use more "politically correct" spellings on European placenames, like WP.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Well, the only time the spelling issue has been raised on this page seems to have been by me, 10 years ago; and I didn't for one moment propose moving the page, I was merely trying to find the best way of reconciling Philippa's conventional and accepted name "of Hainault" with the conventional modern spelling of the county, "Hainaut". The ngram produced by Eric clearly confirms my contention that "Philippa of Hainault" is and always has been the more common form of her name, by a very long way. I actually think your "John of Gaunt" analogy is a very good one, although the spelling divergence is more extreme: the archaic "Gaunt" spelling is preserved in his byname and continues in widespread conventional use, while any mentions of the city of Ghent, in his article or elsewhere, use the modern spelling. GrindtXX (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

OK thanks, so we agree that one question here is whether this is a case like John of Gaunt. I personally don't think it is. I think normal readers don't even know "Gaunt" refers to John's birthplace, but do realize that Philippa is named after the county her family ruled. As mentioned above, I suggest we don't rush. If our positions depend upon what readers generally understand then the logical thing to do is gather feedback. (I don't think ngram makes our decision for us, for the reason explained above. We want to follow recent scholarly norms. I've been trying academic searches. Both spellings are indeed used, which shows you certainly have a point, though the L form is often in bibliographies citing old books. So both spellings seem worth considering.)--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hmm. We could call an RFC? Not sure. Probably wasn't a good idea, but lately I decided to try to resolve a small set of article title concerns for this region and one editor who has been helpful is @Srnec: who I hereby ping (again, sorry Srnec).--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

There might be a project page where you could draw attention from others who've maybe dealt with issues like this before. Maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject_Royalty_and_Nobility or its talkpage? Eric ^talk 19:05, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, we need some further input from somewhere: at the moment it's basically just one against one. There's really not much room for "compromise": we have to agree on one name or the other for the article title, and that also needs to be the name at the head of the lede sentence and at the head of the infobox. (After that, if we settle on "Philippa of Hainault", I'm more than happy to retain the "sometimes spelled Hainaut", and also to retain the "Hainaut" spelling in references to the county.) I appreciate your willingness (Andrew Lancaster) to come to the table in a spirit of courtesy and openness, but on the point at issue I feel you just don't have a case. We are not debating the placename, we are debating Philippa's accepted byname. Wikipedia "generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" (WP:COMMONNAME), and in the present instance that is "Philippa of Hainault". No, we don't have to slavishly follow the ngram, but when it shows the consistent and significant dominance of "Hainault" over many years (and a slight increase in that dominance over the past 30 years) we would have to have some very good reason to go against it. Similarly, the ODNB is about as definitive an authority as you can get. Here are some more scholarly titles, culled from the Bibliography of British and Irish History:

• Caroline Dunn, "All the Queen's Ladies? Philippa of Hainault's Female Attendants", Medieval Prosopography, 31 (2016) 173-208
• Richard W. Barber, "Edward III's Arthurian Enthusiasms Revisited: Perceforest in the Context of Philippa of Hainault and the Round Table Feast of 1344", Arthurian Literature, 30 (2013) 55-74
• W. Mark Ormrod, "Queenship, death and agency: the commemorations of Isabella of France and Philippa of Hainault", in Caroline M. Barron & Clive Burgess (eds), Memory and Commemoration in Medieval England: proceedings of the 2008 Harlaxton Symposium (2010), pp. 87-103
• Caroline Shenton, "Philippa of Hainault's churchings: the politics of motherhood at the court of Edward III", in Richard Eales & Shaun Tyas (eds), Family and Dynasty in Late Medieval England: proceedings of the 1997 Harlaxton Symposium (2003), pp. 105-21
• Veronica Sekules, "Dynasty and patrimony in the self-construction of an English queen: Philippa of Hainault and her images", in John Mitchell & Matthew Moran (eds), England and the Continent in the Middle Ages: proceedings of the 1996 Harlaxton Symposium (2000)

I could go on. I have been selective in that I have limited that list to items that actually include Philippa's name in the title, and that have been published since 2000, but I have not omitted any that use the "Hainaut" spelling – there are none, of any date. Similarly, I have checked Library Hub Discover: it throws up 14 titles (of various dates) that include "Philippa of Hainault" (results here), and none that include "Philippa of Hainaut". WorldCat throws up 54 hits for "Philippa of Hainault" (results here) and 10 for "Philippa of Hainaut" (results here): of the latter, 3 are works in French and so irrelevant to the present discussion, at least 2 are duplicate entries, and the only one that seems to have any claim to authority is the article by Richard Utz in The Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages (2010). One more source I have found that uses the "Hainaut" spelling is (rather to my surprise) the Encyclopaedia Britannica. In other circumstances I might be prepared to treat the Britannica with respect, but as an authority in the field of British biography it is a minnow compared to the ODNB. Perhaps things will look different in 10 years time, but for the present I think that the weight of the argument is overwhelmingly in favour of "Philippa of Hainault" as her common name. GrindtXX (talk) 20:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

• I would probably move it back, since it was moved as noncontroversial and it clearly isn't. After that, we can have an RM if Andrew wants. I personally don't have an issue with either form. I pronounce them the same (not like this). If the ODNB and her biographer go with Hainault, then it's good enough for here. The L spelling is unknown in French, so it is a bit like Gaunt. Especially if people pronounce the L (but I have no idea). Srnec (talk) 01:48, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Well GrindtXX if you feel strongly about it then although I don't prefer it, I clearly misunderstood the strength of the case and it seems I have no really good argument to remove the L, so you could move it back as far as I am concerned. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:19, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

OK, thank you for your civil concession. It doesn't look as if anyone else is going to chip in, so I will do the necessary. GrindtXX (talk) 15:43, 5 September 2021 (UTC)