Talk:Robert Curthose

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Robert II, Duke of Normandy)
Jump to: navigation, search

Meaning of name[edit]

"Curthose" is given as a significant qualifier based upon his shortness of stature, but for the vast majority of English speakers, I can pretty much guarantee that this is cryptic indeed--and a far cry from anything remotely approaching a rationale for this description cum appellation. Perhaps a brief [no pun intended] explanation that "curthose" is anglofrench or whatever for "shortpants" would be worthwhile. Or perhaps even I don't "get it"... Tomertalk 07:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Robert's Family[edit]

Whoever did the original work on this page omitted to include a section on his wife and children, which really needs to be added. Maybe I'll have a chance to do that, but this really isn't my period. --Michael K. Smith 20:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Article title[edit]

Surely this article is referring to Robert II rather than "Robert III, Duke of Normandy". I can cite Encyclopedia Brittanica on this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ts1088 (talkcontribs) 20:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't make sense!!![edit]

His government (or misgovernment) of Normandy as well as his failed invasion of England proves that his military skills were better than his political skills.

This doesn't make sense. He "misgoverned" Normandy and failed to attract political support back at England making him a poor politician. His failures in the 1st Crusade and the invasion of England means that he wasn't exactly a Basil II either. So which is worse, his political skills or his military skills? The above sentence is anti-complimentary! Tourskin (talk) 02:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Henry of Normandy[edit]

Why is Henry of Normandy listed as issue without any reference in the text of the article. Robert's wife died after the birth of his first son, so I assume this reference is a mistake. I've tagged it as Citation Required for now. -- (talk) 15:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Many sources referred Henry to second legitimate son of Robert born in 1102. I think Henry was presumably a twin brother of William Clito. However, I wondered why Henry was accessible to hunt in New Forest (and he died there accidentally) under the reign of Henry I despite the fact they should be enemies.Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 17:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I see no good solid sourcing for there ever to have been such a person. Note that Lack's newish biography of Curthose (published 2007 by Sutton) says (p. 153) about William Clito and his cousin William Aetheling (Henry I's son): "Neither prince was ever to have a brother." LIkewise, Charles Wendell David's biography of Curthose, published in 1920 by Harvard University Press, states (page 146) about Sibyl of Conversano "Soon after the birth of her only child, William the Clito, she died at Rouen...". This is sourced to Orderic Vitalis, and Wace and William of Jumieges. The only source given for this supposed son Henry is a site that doesn't attribute its sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:00, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

For what is worth, Alison Weir mentions this Henry in "Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy", p. 44. Charles Cawley when commenting on the existence of this figure notes: "HENRI de Normandie (1101 after Jun-killed in the New Forest). He is named as second son of Duke Robert by Weir[276], although the primary source on which this is based has not yet been identified. Henri may have been Duke Robert's older legitimate son. Orderic Vitalis records the birth of a son to Robert and his wife in the year after the marriage was consummated in Normandy in Sep 1100. He does not name this son, but records the birth of the couple's son Guillaume "in the third year after his parents' marriage" in a later passage." Dimadick (talk) 21:12, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

the thing is, though... how in the heck was he hunting in the New Forest, when Henry I was doing everything in his power to hunt down William Clito? My guess is that the earlier son died young, as Clito is definitely Curthose's heir at the Battle of Tinechbrai in 1106. I'm much more inclined to go with scholarly biographies over genealogical websites. If Weir doesn't name her sources, and the others DO, that gives stronger emphasis to them. Likewise, I've not turned up any mention of Curthose having another son in Hollister's biography of Henry I (whereas Clito gets LOTS of mentions) nor is a second son mentioned in LePatorel's journal article on the Norman Sucession, or a quick scan of other relevant literature. Weir calls him the second son, but OV is claiming that Clito was the second son, so ... she's clearly not basing this off OV. Whatever the final outcome, any supposed "Henry of Normandy" who is only notable for perhaps existing and stuff doesn't merit his own article. At best, a minor mention here, probably in a footnote. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
some of the arguments above do not seem convincing. That he might have been living in England while his father was being pursued is not impossible--many families in the period, including Henry I's own immediate family, had sharply divided loyalties, even between brothers, let alone half-brothers. On the other hand, I certainly do not consider a popular writer like Weir an authority. OV is the standard primary source for the period, and I would not be willing to reject his testimony without a good modern secondary source spevcifically impeaching it--simply not including it is very weak evidence. DGG ( talk ) 07:20, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Removing useless image[edit]


What is this image supposed to illustrate? It looks like a cyclops, not a human being, and not even a regular cyclops, since all it HAS is one eye – no other features at all on its face! How is such an image supposed to enhance a reader's understanding of this subject? It's ridiculous. I'm going to remove it.--Jim10701 (talk) 00:30, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It's not ridiculous. It's a medieval illustration of Robert. It must be one of the few likenesses of him in existence. I can make out the faint lines of his eyes, nose and mouth, maybe you just need to adjust the brightness settings on your screen. Things deteriorate over time, and the medieval sources which historians have to work with are few and far between. I think the image show stay. It's condition helps illustrates just how long ago Robert lived, and how fragile and precious medieval documents are.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 05:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Robert's ship name...[edit]

I've twice reverted the addition of information here. It's not only already in the article, but consulting with the three biographies of Curthose as well as Hollister's article on the 1101 invasion - I find that no mention of the name of Curthose's ship, much less so much detail about what it's named after, is given. To put the information in the article ... you're going to need to justify why the name of the ship, which is not considered important to the three biographies of Curthose, is so vital to this article. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Name of illegitimate son who died hunting[edit]

This article states "Robert also had at least three illegitimate children – Richard, who died hunting in the New Forest in May 1100", whereas the New Forest article quotes a source, which says "...and Henry, [William I's] Grand-child, by Robert his eldest son, as he pursued his Game, was hanged among the boughs, and so dyed. [sic]". (talk) 20:51, 29 December 2015 (UTC)


The article states, 1) under the image: "The tower in Cardiff castle where Robert Curthose was confined for 26 years"; & 2) [in 1106] "Robert was imprisoned in Devizes Castle for twenty years before being moved to Cardiff." He couldn't have spent 20 years in the one and 26 in the other, considering that he died 28 years, not 46, after being captured and, unless Merlin had a hand in it, I don't think he could have been in two places at the same time. Philologick (talk) 10:43, 23 January 2016 (UTC)