Humanities desk
< January 12	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 14 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 13

Christian Apologetics Books

Dear All

I am an agnostic and was wondering, what the best Christian apologetics books are. I would like to view things from another perspective for once. I have seen some “recommended reading” list online; however, many of these books seemed amateurish, apparently written by lay people. I prefer a more academic work, written by an accomplished expert in the field, and not literature by laymen of theology, philosophy or any branch of science. Could you give me some recommendations and could you tell me (whether you are a believer or not) why you think that the book you recommend makes some good and interesting points?

Thank you for your answers

With kind regards--2A02:120B:2C79:D630:A5B7:DB52:8A86:8D13 (talk) 16:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How about C. S. Lewis? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to check through List of Christian apologetic works to see what sounds promising. A Scientific Theology seems reasonable enough. Matt Deres (talk) 18:50, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I like Matt's suggestion. You seem to have some idea what you are looking for already, but you might also look at the Christian apologetics article to help you pick from the list. -Arch dude (talk) 02:34, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where was Holy Trinity Minories?

Pursuant to the intriguing question above about the head of Henry Grey, I added some bits and pieces to our article about the former Church of Holy Trinity, Minories and realised that no location is given. I was going to add a wikilink to Minories, the name of the street in the City of London, but when I eventually found a picture of it, it obviously wasn't in the main road but down a small side street. Another image on the page, File:Site of Holy Trinity, Portsoken Street, City of London.jpg, shows a small park in Portsoken Street which is indeed a small road leading off Minories, but the only open space there seems to be Portsoken Street Garden and I can't find anything that ties this in with Holy Trinity. Disused churchyards in the City are usually clearly marked as such with a plaque giving a history of the site, but not this one apparently. Alansplodge (talk) 17:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

" Church of the Holy Trinity, Minories, stands at the E. end of St. Clare Street, Minories" according to http://www.british-history.ac.uk/rchme/london/vol5/pp69-101 all we need is an old map as St Clare Street is currently a bit north of the Portsoken Street Garden. But may have been longer a hundred years ago. MilborneOne (talk) 19:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/maps/ may be useful. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 19:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you most kindly. I found an old OS map (1951) which actually shows the site of the church at the end of St Clare Street [1] - the Germans flattened it in the war. I think the Portsoken Street image is just plain wrong and that park has nothing to do with the church. Alansplodge (talk) 23:48, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

"In her own right"

The article List of rulers of Montferrat say "Margaret of Montferrat, daughter of William IX and Anne of Alençon, and Marchioness of Montferrat in her own right" - if she was that, then wasn't she was a ruler, and should't she be in List of rulers of Montferrat herself? Bet there, she is still just referred to as a wife? And her own article gives conflicting years for her reign. Was she really a ruling marchioness, and if so, which years? Thank you.--Aciram (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about the concrete case at hand, but "in her own right" means that she herself holds the title. That does not necessarily imply that she also is the ruler. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 23:39, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the lady herself, Margaret Paleologa, does say she " . . . was an Italian ruler; ruling Marchioness of Montferrat in 1533 - 1536", that her husband Fredrico [whom she had married in 1531] was Federico II Gonzaga, Duke of Mantua, who became "Marquis of Montferrat from 1536," and that "on Federico's death [in 1540], their eldest son, Francesco became Duke of Mantua. As Francesco was still only a minor aged eight, Margaret acted as his regent". On his death in 1550 aged aged 16 (and 49 weeks), "he was succeeded by his younger brother Guglielmo Gonzaga, Duke of Mantua, then aged 11, for whom she also acted as regent . . . ." [my italics throughout].

Reading further into both of their articles and those of her sons, it appears that Margaret married Federico in 1531, inherited the Marquisate in 1533 when her last suviving legitimate male relative, her uncle John George, Marquess of Montferrat (whose own article's infobox lists her as his successor) died, and herself ruled until 1536, when the title was transferred to the Gonzaga family of her husband, who only then became the Marquis and ruled as such until his death in 1840. Margaret then ruled as regent for their son Francesco III Gonzaga, Duke of Mantua, who died in 1550 aged aged 16 (and 49 weeks), and was succeeded by his younger brother Guglielmo Gonzaga, Duke of Mantua, then aged 11, for whom she also "acted as regent, with the help of her brother-in-law Ercole Gonzaga."

This suggests to me that she should legitimately be included in the article List of rulers of Montferrat as last of the Paleologo dynasty for ruling in her own right from 1533 to 1536, and arguably also for being regent from 1540 to 1550 and co-regent from 1550 until whenever Guglielmo Gonzaga came of age – the two regencies could be explained in the text relating to the entries for her two sons. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.41.3 (talk) 01:23, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article on her uncle, John George, Marquess of Montferrat includes the statement that after his death the territory was occupied by the Spanish for three years, before being given to Margaret's husband in 1536. That rather suggests that although he inherited it by right of her claim, she had not been permitted to actually rule in her own right. Wymspen (talk) 15:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And the (almost completely unreferenced) article Monferrat itself says "The March of Montferrat was briefly controlled by Spain (1533–1536) . . . ", which does not preclude Margaret from ruling on a local day-to-day basis under the umbrella of Spanish hegemony. None of these terms are in themselves sufficiently definitive – we really need a more detailed source as to what actually went on, and we could do with better sources for all of these related articles. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.41.3 (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]