Talk:Archduke Albrecht, Duke of Teschen

Untitled

Since he was Duke of Teschen, shouldn't this be moved to "Archduke Albrecht, Duke of Teschen", similar to his follower Archduke Friedrich, Duke of Teschen? This could also solve this rather complicated (when-he-lived-in-brackets) format... Gryffindor 10:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that should be the case. Every archduke and archduchess of a different line (Tuscany, Modena, etc) should follow that form. Charles 18:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I agree too. Deb 21:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Sometimes it seems that there are soooo many "X of Austria", and most times, they could be further categorizes at "of Teschen", "of Tuscany" or "of Modena". You've got my vote. Prsgoddess187 23:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. This is a totally different situation from Tuscany and Modena which were both reigning families. The Library of Congress name authority for him (based on usage) is "Albrecht, Archduke of Austria, 1817-1895". There are at least six German-language biographies of him. In not a single title is there any mention of duke of Teschen. The current page name conforms with English usage. Noel S McFerran 07:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Hm. Well he was duke of Teschen, that is a fact, it even states on the German Wikipedia. He was made Duke of Österreich-Teschen, similar to his relatives who were from Austria-Este, Modena, Österreich-Toskana, etc. The idea is to follow the naming pattern of Prince Lorenz, Archduke of Austria-Este, Francis IV, Duke of Modena, and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh for example... Gryffindor 15:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

That is inaccurate. The Tuscans weren't made "of Austria-Tuscany", etc. Teschen was created as a seperate title. I'm for Archduke Albert, Duke of Teschen. Charles 19:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Let me try to make this clearer. Archduke Albrecht was Duke of Teschen, but he was never called Duke of Teschen. He was always referred to as the Archduke Albrecht. Duke of Teschen was a title he held, but not the title generally used for him. In an encyclopedia we gather what scholarship has already been written; we don't create totally new things. Since he wasn't called Duke of Teschen, we shouldn't call him Duke of Teschen (although we should cite in the article that he held this title). By the way, the German Wikipedia article never calls him "Duke of Österreich-Teschen" as Gryffindor says above; in fact the article never mentions at all that he was Duke of Teschen (although it does say that he owned the estate at Teschen). Noel S McFerran 02:49, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

So the German Wikipedia makes no mention of this, but we are? So was he Duke of Teschen or not, or why is it mentioned in the lead sentence then? Would the Archduke Friedrich, Duke of Teschen format be wrong then as well? I am confused now. Gryffindor 21:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

He was the Duke of Teschen, without a doubt. Charles 21:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so his successor was, but the previous one not? I don't get this... Gryffindor 21:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Oops, I meant to say, yes, Albert was the Duke of Teschen. Frederick had been as well. Whether or not he "used" the title or not is sort of irrelevant because it's sole purpose is to distinguish from other Alberts. Birth and death dates do that as well, but all of that can be replaced with Duke of Teschen, distinguishing Albert still from the other Alberts. Charles 23:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Imperial connections

Some authors, eg Brigitte Hamann refer to him as the Emperor Franz Joseph's great uncle. This is incorrect - that would be his father, Archduke Charles, brother of Franz Joseph's grandfather, Emperor Franz. Technically he was Franz Joseph's cousin once removed! --Michael Goodyear (talk) 22:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Rename to ... Albrecht... instead of ...Albert...

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Moved. Doesn't seem controversial to me (and, if the NYT called him Albrecht ....!) --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 12:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Archduke Albert, Duke of Teschen → Archduke Albrecht, Duke of Teschen — I suggest this be renamed Archduke Albrecht, Duke of Teschen because

1. Albrecht, not Albert, was his name.
2. Albert is a different name, and is also used in German (see, e.g. Prince Albert of Saxony, Duke of Teschen and Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.
3. Albrecht's statue stands outside of the Albertina, which is named after the afore-mentioned Albert of Saxony, Duke of Teschen, not after our Albrecht.
4. If we persist in calling Albrecht "Albert", the reader may wrongly assume that the Albertina is named after him, especially when we have a picture of that statue in the article, and its caption makes reference to the Albertina. (The statue is where it is because Albrecht lived in the adjacent Albertina.)
5. The latin-character original names of particular persons not generally known to most English-speaking readers anyway (even by an anglicized name) should not have their names anglicized (in my opinion). We don't call Johannes Brahms "John Brahms," which would be a more accurate anglicization of "Johannes" than "Albert" is of "Albrecht."
6. There is no useful purpose served by misstating his name as "Albert."

--StanZegel (talk) 03:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Holstein - relevant?

The page (section Military Campaigns) mentions in the aftermath of the 1866 war with Prussia "the loss of Holstein to Prussia". I thought Holstein had been annexed from the Kingdom of Denmark, not the Austrian Empire.Cloptonson (talk) 18:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)