Jump to content

Talk:Henrietta Maria of France

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Henrietta Maria)

move

[edit]

Proposal: Henrietta Maria of France be moved to Henrietta Maria of France. (made by Mowens) as per Wiki naming guidelines for former queens consort.

misc

[edit]

Does anybody know of a member of the court of Queen Henrietta Maria of France by the name of Cox or cock or perhaps Coq. I am trying to help a friend to do some research. He was apparently a an officer of her guard or a messenger. I would be delighted if you could point me in the right direction. Thanks Lawrence Farrell

Murder claims

[edit]

Buckingham was murdered in August 1628, probably with the backing of Queen Henrietta and her French faction at the Royal court.

Buckingham was murdered by Sir John Felton, who had served in the recent campaigns and was reflecting public mood. Is there any evidence that Henrietta Maria had anything to do with it? Sonic Mew | talk to me 18:26, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Widow

[edit]

This section had been removed. I've reverted that edit, but if there is a genuine reason to remove it, maybe it should be discussed here, on the talk page first. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 07:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Suggestion to merge Descendants page

[edit]

Decendants_of_Henrietta_Maria_de_Bourbon

Some one suggested that they be merged but other editors have complained about the decendants being to much of a monster. I had to agree and feel that seperate Descendants and Ancesters pages be made but linked from main article.

What I am trying to do is do wot I iz done so far but have each image allowing you to drill up/down following the lines of descent/ascent. I feel kids find it fun and can relate to these things better.

in summary, I don't mind but I think the main page will become to large. --Nexus5 21:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maryland

[edit]

The U.S. state of Maryland (in Latin, "Terra Mariae") was so named in her honour by Cæcilius Calvert, son of George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore.

This claim is referenced to this page, but I don't see anything on there that actually supports the specifics mentioned here. My source tells the story slightly differently and with extra detail, so I rewrote it and referenced. The name was given by Charles II, and it was Lord Baltimore the father who dealt with Charles over the issue. Baltimore died very shortly after that, but in any case it was not his son who gave Maryland its name. Pfly (talk) 17:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Date of Birth

[edit]

I have seen in books a date for 26 November.Debrett's gives this.Surely ifshe's been born on St.Catherine's Day(25November),she'd have Catherine as one of her names.Perhaps ,there's confusion on account of Catherine of Braganza sharing the same date.does anyone know the correct date?jeanne (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Henrietta Maria's Birthday

[edit]

The date for Henrietta Maria's birthday was incorrect. It was not November 25th but November 16th. This has been corrected. This should also address the query above. Charles I's birthday was on November 19th, and thus as a result these two birthdays sandwiched the once popular celebration of November 17th (Elizabeth's coronation). Parishes were therefore ordered to ring in celebration of these two birthdays so as to prevent them from being overshadowed by the celebrations for Elizabeth that had come back into vogue in the 1620s. (Radamhill (talk) 20:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Henrietta Maria's birthdate is invariably given as 25 or 26 November 1609. A 16 November date would have been correct had she been born in England where the Julian calendar was still in use but seeing as she was born in France where the Gregorian calendar had been implemented in 1582, Henrietta Maria would have had a 25/26 November date of birth.jeanne (talk) 14:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted her birthdate to the correct 25 November, although it's possible she was born on the 26th. the 16th date is clearly how it was dated in England where they were on the Julian calendar but as she was born in France, it's incorrect to give this as her DOB.jeanne (talk) 18:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely right. However, I do think it is worth noting that her birthday was celebrated in England on November 16th; and almost certainly with royal approval. It is indeed a unique situation. I do believe that David Cressy refers to her birthdate as November 16th in his book, Bonfires and Bells. As I already mentioned, the celebration of her birthday on November 16th held some significance given its proximity to traditional celebrations of Elizabeth's coronation day. Perhaps this should somehow be acknowledged in the main article. Any thoughts? Radamhill (talk) 23:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as 16 November was the date celebrated in England, that would make her born on 26 November and not the 25th, as the Julian calendar was 10 days behind the Gregorian in the 17th century. I think historians have confused Henrietta's birthdate with that of her daughter-in-law Catherine of Braganza who was born 25 November. Therefore, her accurate DOB would be 16 November Old Style and 26 November New Style.--jeanne (talk) 14:00, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images?

[edit]

What happened to the beautiful images of the queen?? if this images are already on the public domain why did you remove them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lefairh (talk • contribs) 23:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put back the beautiful paintings by Anthonis van Dyck.--Kaho Mitsuki (talk) 13:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove or change images, especially in the intro box, without a consensus here.--jeanne (talk) 13:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New file File:Henrietta Maria by Sir Anthony Van Dyck.jpg

[edit]

Recently the file File:Henrietta Maria by Sir Anthony Van Dyck.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 09:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gibberish sentence

[edit]

"She despised Puritan courtiers to deflect a diplomatic approach to Spain and sought a coup to pre-empt the Parliamentarians." What does this mean?96.33.241.26 (talk) 22:41, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It doesn't make sense.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 04:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While editing this article, I fell upon this sentnece & have no idea of what to do with it. It makes no sense. Hope the ire of the gods will not fall upon me if I remove it... Frania W. (talk) 22:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't be removed. It should be rephrased. There is a reference that supports the claim that Henrietta Maria was pro-Spanish and anti-puritan: Royalists and royalism during the English civil wars. The book says that Henrietta Maria and her husband were rare hardcore royalists who were pro-Spanish and anti-puritan. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Translation following translated terms

[edit]

It makes more sense to have a translation directly after/against the word or phrase translated, than having the two separated by dates & other details.

Also, the FA article Ælfheah of Canterbury given as an example by Surtsinca is not a rule in itself as other FA articles, such as Joan of Arc & Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky and non featured articles, such as Frédéric Chopin, Jeanne III of Navarre, Marie Antoinette, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart... keep names & their translation before DoB&DoD.

Frania W. (talk) 20:39, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and put the translation before the dates. My only goal was to put both the translation and the dates in the same brackets. A pair of brackets followed by another pair of brackets = too many brackets. Surtsicna (talk) 18:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

[edit]

I've gone through and expanded the article a bit, including some in-line citations. I'm not convinced I've quite got the balance right (her religion is more prominent than I'd expected when I started out), however, and it may need a bit more work in some other areas of her life. I've followed some recent authors in referring to Henrietta Maria as just "Henrietta" in places, but obviously feel free to expand out again if others dislike this style! There'll be various typos etc. I suspect. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just did some links to her daughter Princess Henrietta of England; just to let you know she was known as Henriette as the name Anne was given to her when she went to France in 1646 so I sorted that all out =] I'm glad someone paid the Queen some attention, she derserves it! Monsieur le Duc LouisPhilippeCharles (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

[edit]

The recent additions are really rather awful, aren't they. Apart from typos, such as catholic instead of Catholic, some of the language used (such as 'Momentous and joyful as the restoration was in the annals of the Stuarts') is unnecessarily ostentatious. Needless to say, most of it is not cited either. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

59.182.157.211, I'd urge you to have a look at WP:RELIABLE and WP:CITE, which give some background on the sorts of sources you need to be using. I'd agree with Celia that phrases like "Momentous and joyful..." aren't exactly ideal for an encyclopaedic article. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:53, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 May 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 18:05, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Henrietta Maria of France → Henriette Marie of France – Despite that both the names Henriette and Marie exist within the English lexicon, this article is titled Henrietta Maria for unclear reasons, as Mary is the Anglicized variant of Marie. Her daughter is named Henrietta instead of Henriette, establishing that birth decides the name over marriage. Given that the provided signature reads, "Henriette Marie," should we not change the name to her utilization and liking? – Conservatrix (talk) 15:05, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This move request was sought in error. Would it be to my liking if she were Henriette Marie? Yes. Would she appreciate being free of her husband's English culture? Probably, but it has become standard to use a consort's marital name, e.g. Marie Antoinette, Maria Feodorovna, Catherine de Medici. The Henrietta of England article should be moved instead. Nevertheless, I will yield to the community whether or not this article is moved. – Conservatrix (talk) 00:52, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: No, we should not change it to her utilization and liking because she was a 17th-century French woman and this is a 21st-century encyclopedia. Spelling has changed a lot since her times. The Encyclopædia Britannica, the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, and all the source listed in this article name her Henrietta Maria. Surtsicna (talk) 23:04, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The Encyclopedia Britannica offers Henriette-Marie as an alternative spelling, and its search function redirects to her page when Henriette-Marie (queen consort of England) is chosen. – Conservatrix (talk) 23:35, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose since both names are okay, so the current one is not broken. If someone can show that a strong majority of modern sources in English prefer one over the other then use that version. Otherwise, "Ain't broke; don't 'fix' it."  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The French Wikipedia article has her under the name she was known by in France, but it's long been the practice to "translate" certain historic French names to the more commonly-known English equivalents: Marie = Maria or Mary, Philippe = Philip, Jean = John, Jeanne = Joan, Jacques = James, etc. And the French will normally do the same, in reverse, for the names of well-known English historical figures. So I think we should stick with Henrietta Maria. I do notice that in the French Wikipedia article referenced above, there is a fine gallery of eight Van Dyke portraits of the Queen. Could these be imported into the English article? Thomas Peardew (talk) 06:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. 'Henrietta Maria' is the common name in English: see the citations listed at the end of the article and the English-language links in the Authority control template. Celia Homeford (talk) 07:37, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 5 August 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved per consensus. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Henrietta Maria of France → Henrietta Maria – Per WP:COMMONNAME, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, WP:PRECISE, and WP:CONCISE. The books cited in the article call her Henrietta Maria, not Henrietta Maria of France. ODNB calls her Henrietta Maria. Britannica calls her Henrietta Maria. All of the books available on Google Books call her Henrietta Maria, not Henrietta Maria of France. This is the primary topic for "Henrietta Maria", which is why the name already redirects here. The present title of the article appears to be the product of the WP:NCROY guideline but it does not reflect usage outside Wikipedia, thus contravening Wikipedia's titling policy. Surtsicna (talk) 13:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Contradictory

[edit]

The introduction says her husband forced the name of "Queen Mary" but the article text says he preferred to call her Maria. The introduction says she signed her name Henriette (without Maria) but the infobox shows her signature as Henriette Marie. Celia Homeford (talk) 07:44, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean we can change the name into another one. As following WP:UCRN and WP:CONSORTS we should preserve its name. I will write references for you.

-- Wendylove (talk) 08:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, indeed it doesn't mean we should change the article title. Now that everyone is agreed on that, perhaps you could address the actual point of this discussion instead of an irrelevant issue? Celia Homeford (talk) 09:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. If you see the introduction, she is known as Queen Mary in England. It can be interpreted as King wanted English people to call her as Queen Mary, but he himself called his wife as "Maria". Also, it doesn't seem to be contradict to use two different signature, because it says Henrietta R was used in letter but doesn't mention about which signature she used in other documents such as diary or official paper. -- Wendylove (talk) 14:11, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It can also be interpreted in other ways, and if she signed her name multiple ways, then the article should either say that she signed her name multiple ways or not say that she signed her name a specific way. The article is contradictory when it says one thing in one place and something else in another. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:44, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 May 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved per consensus (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc.talk 15:33, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Henrietta Maria → Henrietta Maria of France – Per WP:CONSORTS and the general format "{Name} of {Place}" for deceased queens and empresses consort. "Henrietta Maria of France" also has more page views than the actual target [3]. Estar8806 (talk) 00:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (please mention me on reply) 19:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think we ought to stick the format for consistency reasons. AKTC3 (talk) 09:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Nonsense! Read WP:CONSORTS properly, there is no consistent standard for royal consorts. There is no other "Henrietta Maria", so no need to disambiguate her. She did come from France, but she was queen consort of England, Scotland and Ireland. There have been attempts in the past to create a consistent standard of referring to queens consort by their maiden title, but this was abandoned after a complex and slightly heated debate at Marie of Romania. PatGallacher (talk) 23:37, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And yet Marie of Romania is still {Name} of {Place}. The vast majority of deceased consorts use {Name} of {Place}. estar8806 (talk) ★ 19:13, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per PatGallacher. WP:CONSORTS shows that there are a variety of acceptable formats for titling royal consorts' articles. Checking the DAB page at Henriette Marie, I'm not seeing anything that would suggest that the existing title of "Henrietta Maria" is ambiguous; therefore, the format of the existing title is ideal. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:10, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject France has been notified of this discussion. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Biography has been notified of this discussion. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:42, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 23 June 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Clear consensus against proposal; editors are encouraged to wait at least a year before opening additional move requests, although no formal moratorium is imposed. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 10:36, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Henrietta Maria of France → Henrietta Maria – Use the name everyone uses, people. It's not only our policy, it's common sense. Nobody in last month's move request bothered addressing the fact that the subject is overwhelmingly more often called Henrietta Maria. The very sources cited in this article call her Henrietta Maria. Generously leaving out those that call her "Queen Henrietta Maria" instead of just "Henrietta Maria", those sources are:

  • Bulman, William J. “The Practice of Politics: The English Civil War and the ‘Resolution' of Henrietta Maria and Charles I.” Past & Present, no. 206, 2010, pp. 43–79.
  • Griffey, Erin. (2008) Henrietta Maria: piety, politics and patronage. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
  • Munro, Lucy. "The Queen and the Cockpit: Henrietta Maria's Theatrical Patronage Revisited." Shakespeare Bulletin, vol. 37 no. 1, 2019, p. 25–45.
  • White, Michelle A. (2006) Henrietta Maria and the English Civil Wars. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

The books in the Further reading section call her Henrietta Maria too:

  • de Lisle, Leanda (2022). Henrietta Maria: The Warrior Queen Who Divided a Nation. New York and London: Pegasus Books.
  • Griffey, Erin. (March 2023) 'Re-Dressing the Evidence: Henrietta Maria’s Wardrobe Accounts, 1627–1639', Costume, 57:1, pp. 3–30
  • Hamilton, Elizabeth (1976). Henrietta Maria. New York: Coward, MacCann & Geoghegan Inc. ISBN 978-0698107137. OCLC 1149193817.
  • Oman, Carola (1936). Henrietta Maria. London: Hodder and Stoughton Limited.

Books not mentioned in the article calling her Henrietta Maria (again without "Queen Henrietta Maria") include:

  • Pearce, Dominic (2015). Henrietta Maria. Amberley Publishing Limited.
  • Dunn-Hensley, Susan (2017). Anna of Denmark and Henrietta Maria: Virgins, Witches, and Catholic Queens. Springer.
  • Lunger Knoppers, Laura (2017). Politicizing Domesticity from Henrietta Maria to Milton's Eve. Cambridge University Press.
  • Plowden, Allison (2001). Henrietta Maria: Charles I's Indomitable Queen. Sutton.
  • Haynes, Henrietta (1912). Henrietta Maria. Methuen & Company, Limited.
  • Marshall, Rosalind Kay (1991). Henrietta Maria, the Intrepid Queen. Stemmer House Publishers.
  • Harris, Carolyn (2016). Queenship and Revolution in Early Modern Europe: Henrietta Maria and Marie Antoinette. Springer.
  • Bell, Jessica (2008). The Three Marys: The Virgin; Marie de Médicis; and Henrietta Maria. Routledge.

To conclude with these, here are the books calling her "Henrietta Maria". Here are the books with "Henrietta Maria of France" in the title. To spare you a click, there are none.

Then there are countless articles published in academic journals, calling her almost exclusively Henrietta Maria.

Finally web sources calling her Henrietta Maria rather than Henrietta Maria of France include:

I thought we were past the urge to move articles to the most obscure titles possible. Are we returning to the dark age of Wiki inventions such as Marie Antoinette of Austria, Mary I of Scotland, Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom? Is Sophia of the Palatinate next? For what possible reason should this article be under a title used by no historian who ever wrote anything substantial about this woman? Surtsicna (talk) 17:37, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, please. Wait a year before suggesting that the article be moved back to the name that every historian uses to refer to her? Last month's move was made without any regard to the usage in sources. It is a mockery of the normal RM procedure, Wikipedia policy, and scholarly practice. Surtsicna (talk) 22:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I don't understand how the nom could consider "Henrietta Maria of France" to be a 'Wiki invention'. Her name was Henrietta Maria, and she was born a Fille de France (hence of France).
I think it's also important that it be mentioned that three of the four web source provided mention some other form of disambiguating her (usually as a subtitle):
  • Britannica uses "Henrietta Maria" with the subtitle "queen consort of England"
  • Oxford DNB actually uses the title "Henrietta Maria [Princess Henrietta Maria of France]]
  • National Portrait Gallery uses "Queen of Charles I" in subtext.
I've said this time and time again that WP:COMMONNAME is often thought to be the only policy we have. It's not, there are five other criteria we are supposed to consider as part of the naming policy. One of those is WP:CONSISTENT, which gives weight to WP:CONSORTS.
In any case, what harm is done by adding "of France". It improves recognizability for those who may not know who "Henrietta Maria" (or that there is only one of note). There's no WP:SURPRISE in adding "of France".
The title is not a 'Wiki invention', just as Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is not, that is who she was; that's like saying Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom is also a Wiki invention"; the same goes for the others mentioned above, except Marie Antoinette. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:30, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The title "Henrietta Maria of France" is a Wikipedianism that does not exist in the real world. In the real world, historians call this woman "Henrietta Maria". How does appending "of France" to her name help recognizability when nobody calls the woman "Henrietta Maria of France"? It obviously hurts recognizability to use an obscure name instead of the universally used one. Surtsicna (talk) 22:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is correct that the subject is known by her given names, and the given names "Henrietta Maria" already form part of the current title. Her husband is also referred to as "Charles I" in some of the book titles, but here we have his page at Charles I of England for disambiguation purposes. Obviously, that is not a concern here because there have been no other queens with this name to the best of my knowledge. I also need to point out that what Surtsicna is suggesting does not go against WP:CONSORTS, which states Sometimes the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, and can be used without any qualifier, as in Marie Antoinette. Moving the page would disrupt the consistency with the pages on her sisters (Elisabeth of France (1602–1644) and Christine of France) and the pages on the majority of British royal consorts which use territorial designations; but WP:COMMONNAME usually takes precedence. Which is why at the moment the page on Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother is not at "Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon", so this so called consistency has already been broken. Keivan.fTalk 00:02, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent observation. I would like to add that the format X of State is far from standard in Category:English royal consorts. If you take a look, you will see X of State (e.g. Catherine of Aragon, Mary of Modena), X of Dynasty (e.g. Catherine of Braganza, Isabella of Valois), X Surname (e.g. Anne Neville, Catherine Parr), and several singular special cases (e.g. Lord Guildford Dudley, Ealdgyth (wife of Edmund Ironside)). The only consistency in that category, aside from "Henrietta Maria of France", is the use of the names used by historians. That works. Enforcing obscure names does not. Surtsicna (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I now see that this was already noted by PatGallacher. Surtsicna (talk) 07:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Well, just doing a quick dip into most of the books cited above, and all of them refer to "Henrietta Maria of France" in them. Publishers choose short punchy titles for commercial reasons. There are books simply called "Chatham" and "Brougham" and "Byron" and "Einstein". That's not the names of their articles on Wikipedia. Walrasiad (talk) 09:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your dip must have been too quick because that is blatantly untrue. Here is an overview of all the books cited here:
  • Henrietta Maria: piety, politics and patronage: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Henrietta Maria and the English Civil Wars: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Henrietta Maria: The Warrior Queen Who Divided a Nation: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Henrietta Maria: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Anna of Denmark and Henrietta Maria: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Politicizing Domesticity from Henrietta Maria to Milton's Eve: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Henrietta Maria: Charles I's Indomitable Queen: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Henrietta Maria: The Intrepid Queen: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
  • Queenship and Revolution in Early Modern Europe: Henrietta Maria and Marie Antoinette: 0 mentions of "Henrietta Maria of France"
Pray tell how it is that you found references to "Henrietta Maria of France" in them and, if you still insist all of the cited books contain them, please cite the pages. Surtsicna (talk) 21:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They started showing up when I started looking, e.g. Henrietta Maria: The Warrior Queen Who Divided a Nation has it on p.iv, Pearce's Henrietta Maria on p.vi, etc. Others have "Henrietta Maria de Bourbon", or longer phrasing as "Henrietta Maria, princess of France", or "Henrietta Maria, daughter of France", etc. To say nothing of the ones who identify her as "Queen Henrietta Maria" or "Henrietta Maria, consort of Charles I" as identifiers, (often with the term "French" somewhere in there), and the terms "queen" and "consort" which we don't have available for article titles. We're not selling books to a market of specialists or royal kitsch aficionados who can live with abbreviations, but making articles for the general public. She's not a household name like Marie Antoinette. Henrietta Maria does not stand alone as self-evidently recognizable, without expressing her title as a queen or princess, for which "of France" serves that purpose here. Walrasiad (talk) 02:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The term "Henrietta Maria of France" appears once in Pearce and de Lisle, not in the running text but in their genealogical tables. Is this what you meant when you said that "all of them" contain references to "Henrietta Maria of France"? The genealogical tables in 2 out of 9 books? Appositive descriptions such as "Henrietta Maria, consort of Charles I" are irrelevant unless you plan to suggest one of them as the article title. Justin Welby is quite commonly referred to as "Justin Welby, archbishop of Canterbury" and Emma Darwin is often called "Emma Darwin, wife of Charles Darwin". It is not the job of article titles to define the subject, and the names "Justin Welby" and "Emma Darwin" are enough to identify them just as "Henrietta Maria" is enough to identify the queen. In any case, the obscure term "Henrietta Maria of France" does not even define Henrietta Maria. She is not notable as some Frenchwoman but as the queen of England. Only a royal kitsch afficionado would even understand that the "of France" appendage is meant to mark her as a princess or queen. Her name, Henrietta Maria, is not an abbreviation for anything. It is what she is called, clearly and overwhelmingly if not exclusively. Surtsicna (talk) 07:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Once you introduce someone, you don't need to keep repeating their full name in the running text. The surrounding context fulfills that. Book titles or subtitles also provide context e.g. identifying her as Charles I's queen. We don't have that luxury. Wikipedia article titles are not running text. They are meant to be recognizable on their own without context.
Appellations like "of France" are surnames, common for European royal consorts and princesses. Indeed, we use it for nearly all of them. Yes, Henrietta Maria of France was a consort queen of England. So was Isabella of France, Phillipa of Hainaut, Anne of Bohemia, Margaret of Anjou, Catherine of Aragon, Anne of Cleves, Anne of Denmark, Catherine of Braganza, Sophia Dorothea of Celle, Caroline of Ansbach, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, etc. If you want to start including consort titles as a matter of policy in article titles, that's something to take up with NCROY. Walrasiad (talk) 07:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But "Henrietta Maria of France" is not her full name. "of France" is not her surname. Her surname, if any, was de Bourbon or "of Bourbon", as used during her own lifetime. I do not want to start including consort titles as a matter of policy. I want the present article titling policy to apply to this article: use the name that historians use to refer to this woman (WP:COMMONNAME). Surtsicna (talk) 07:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is her full name form as commonly given in English sources (and French sources, for that matter). It is as much a surname as yours or mine - her father's house. She is a daughter of the royal house of France. Like her sisters Elizabeth of France and Christine of France. As with all other consorts and princesses on Wikipedia.
"Henrietta Maria" is first name only. Unlike specialized books, we don't have the benefit of subtitles or context to clarify this refers to Charles I's queen, rather than a TV show character, a pop star or a music hall dancer. The article title has to stand alone without context. Using "of France" improves recognizability.
She does not have the popular cachet of Marie Antoinette or Cher to stand on a first name basis only. She has a surname - "of France". Use it. Walrasiad (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Old and new castle of Saint-Germain-en-Laye

[edit]

User talk:Keadence User:Surtsicna User:SaltineCreature User:Robinvp11 User talk:ByTheDarkBlueSea In Henrietta Maria's time there were two royal castles at Saint-Germain-en-Laye, the old one (Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye) and the new one (Château-Neuf de Saint-Germain-en-Laye). Now-a-days there is only one left, the old one. The new one was demolished at the French revolution (or almost all of it). The article needs to distinguish clearly between these two castles.

Henrietta-Maria had the use of the new one only. The old one seems to have been Louis XIV's main residence in these times and clearly was so later before he moved to Versailles in 1682. The new castle was Henrietta Maria's country house as Sauvageot says. When in town, she lived, seems it, at the Louvre. It does not seem so clear which was her main residence. I have not been able to read Kitson, cited by Hchc2009 for the new castle being her residence. This source does not sem to be available on line. Johannes Schade (talk) 13:08, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This can't be used as a reference, but:
"Prior to this, he [Louis XIV] had, as a child, graciously turned the building over to his aunt Queen Henrietta Maria of England and her children for use as a summer palace (they were usually housed in an apartment in the Louvre) and therefore the château would have been very familiar to his cousins Henrietta, Charles, James and Henry in their youth."
https://madameguillotine.co.uk/2012/01/11/st-germain-en-laye/ ByTheDarkBlueSea (talk) 17:32, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here is quote from a book which essentially says the same thing:
"Louis called Henrietta Maria ‘ma tante’. She called him ‘Monsieur’. She received a pension of 1,200 francs a day, an apartment in the Louvre and frequent invitations to court. [...] Henrietta Maria and Charles II, and their courtiers, sometimes spent the summer in the Château Neuf of Saint­ Germain"
King of the World: The Life of Louis XIV by Philip Mansel
At google books here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=XdJtDwAAQBAJ&pg=PP53&lpg=PP53&dq=%22Henrietta+Maria%22+%22Ch%C3%A2teau-Neuf%22+%22Germain%22&source=bl&ots=E58Qv4dL8a&sig=ACfU3U3UDIkTuR2x44sf2kaJnDTK5kxTiA&hl=no&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwij69LBwvGCAxU8HRAIHe5QAl04FBDoAXoECAQQAw#v=onepage&q=%22Henrietta%20Maria%22%20%22Ch%C3%A2teau-Neuf%22%20%22Germain%22&f=false
Kindle version on Amazon here:
https://www.amazon.com/King-World-Life-Louis-XIV-ebook/dp/B07KMD19KC/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr ByTheDarkBlueSea (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to An Itinerary of Fraunce and Italy in the Years 1647 and 1648: by Isaac Basire by David F. Jones, a thesis submitted for the degree of BPhil at the University of St Andrews (1973), "The Queen was installed at St. Germains towards the end of August 1644."
Footnote 31, referred to on p. 4.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/210589066.pdf ByTheDarkBlueSea (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to Henrietta Maria (1936) by Carola Oman:
"With the approach of the dead season in Paris, Henrietta had moved out to the château of St Germain, which Anne of Austria had munificently presented to her as a summer residence. During the minority of Louis XIV the French court never occupied the Louvre, so the Queen of England had possession of all the royal apartments of two palaces."
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.526706/page/n203/mode/2up?q=Germain ByTheDarkBlueSea (talk) 20:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Henrietta_Maria_of_France&oldid=1206879347"