Talk:Carl Bernadotte

Entire roster of decendants relevant?

I take issue with a section like Issue in this article. If WP is not a forum for genealogy at large how are all those names relevant to his bio? Some of these kids were born after his death and never even met Carl. Are they a part of his life story in any relevant way? SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Removed great-grandchildren & marriage info not pertaining to Bernadotte himself. SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:48, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

The ancestry should indicate the origins of an individual rather than the progeny and the progeny's progeny, therefore unless the historical character is of particular importance and has given rise to a descent of significant historical characters, the inclusion of a genealogy is unnecessary, albeit it might be interesting to the casual reader. In my opinion, for all intents and purposes it may be removed in this case. Similar trees do not exist for more important characters. Rrobotto (talk) 17:40, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Coronet over arms

I see that the Belgian arms with the correct coronet have been replaced by an escutcheon without the coronet. In this case, the arms with the coronet are described (including the coronet) in several reliable publications, one of which has a photograph of the arms, with this coronet, as displayed at Riddarholm Church. I am reinstating the full arms acordingly, and adding sources. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The coronet on the picture is not the one depicted in those sources. The shield should be crowned with a Belgian princely coronet, not the one of a marquess. See Crown (Heraldry)#Belgium. A have added the relevant template. /Elzo 90 (talk) 07:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Coronet drawn as per Commons usage to match published arms

Arms on his stationery

It's necessary and unavoidable to address this with personal comments:

On May 23 of this year I sent you an e-mail showing the coronet published in the Serafimerorden book in color, which, redrawn as per normal practice at Commons, and using long established formats there, is the same as the one in these arms (image here). You replied the same day and thanked me for that, and in all the discussions you and I have had about this, you have never once previously claimed that the Serafimerorden book has the wrong coronet.

The Berghman book (sorry I put the wrong ref there, will fix that in a moment), with which you are quite familiar, also has an image of the same arms, in black and white. These are the only arms - and the only coronet - which we know have been used officially for Prince Bernadotte as a Belgian nobleman.

The coronet also corresponds well with the coronet used on his personal stationery (image here), which I also e-mailed you in May, including his letter on which is appears. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done - ref fixed. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:24, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I am glad that we can finish the conversation we started earlier. Both the sources have correct depictions, but the Commons image is faulty in that the coronet lacks the red cap with the golden tassel. It is an integral part of the coronet. Without it, it becomes something else - the coronet of a Belgian marquess. Those without access to the sources can find arms with the correct coronet here (p. 167). I am putting the template back. /Elzo 90 (talk) 18:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I do not agree that the cap and tassel are needed. See Coronet. The coronet's design in itself - the jewelled metal part - is what is essential in determining rank.

If you know where there is an image of a coronet of a Belgian marquess at Commons, and also the type of coronet you would like to see on the escutcheon, please post them here, so I can see what you mean. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:29, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

PS The coronet you linked to is not of the same design (note very different jewels on the ring) as the one in the books I've cited. So it is not as accurate to depict Bernadotte's coronet. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

As you can see in the article Coronet, a cap marks the difference between a Spanish grandee and a duke, as well as the difference between a French duke or marquess who is a peer and a duke or marquess who is not. There is no rule that says only the metal part of the crown is essential. You cannot remove the cap and tassel without altering the coronet.

There is a picture at Commons from Heraldischer Atlas (1889) by Hugo Gerard Ströhl. It depicts a coronet with five visible strawberry leaves and has an excerpt from the book that states that it is the coronet for marquess in Belgium and the Netherlands, and for count in Germany, Austria, Sweden and Norway. The arrangement of the jewels is not important. /Elzo 90 (talk) 08:13, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I do not agree that the cap is significant, and Bernadotte himself used the coronet on his stationery without a cap.

I also stand by my opinion that we should only have a coronet, with or without a cap, which coincides as exactly as possible with Bernadotte's known arms - jewels, shallowness/width and all - not a coronet of a different design and of our own choosing. In any case, the books state explicitly that the coronot is that of a "Belgian prince" not of any marquess or count, of any nationality. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:49, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

PS I have now asked a few users at WP:HV, active this year, to chime in here. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:04, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

According to the coronet descriptions provided, the cap and tuft seem tohave a significance in distinguishing certain noble titles. The reference states that the design is important in distinguishing nobility, and this may include jewels, engravings, and so on, although descriptions of the coronets of different ranks give most importance to the design of the coronet, whether it bears leaves, which type of leaves, and what jewels adorn it (see Earl's Coronet. I agree that it is futile to debate about the presence or absence of a cap, and the most accurate depiction of the house's crown should be given. For further reference you may refer to: Casa de Bernadotte (ES) Rrobotto (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

You could ask the Conseil de la noblesse whether it can settle the disagreement. For what it's worth, the case of Carl Bernadotte strikes me as so completely sui generis that until you can find a suitable authority the best thing may be to stick to whatever he used himself. But of course it's possible that he didn't care very much about the rules of Belgian (or Swedish) heraldry and got it wrong. Moonraker (talk) 19:16, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both! The 2 books I've cited do indeed show exactly what coronet was used for him by the Swedish government on arms posted in Riddarholm Church. This is an exact Commons match to them in every significant detail (albeit here without the cap). I will ask on that French page also. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:27, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prince Carl Bernadotte. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141208020309/http://royalista.com/58007/swedish-and-norwegian-royals-at-funeral-of-princess-kristine/ to http://royalista.com/58007/swedish-and-norwegian-royals-at-funeral-of-princess-kristine/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 5 September 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) SilverLocust 💬 23:49, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

---

Prince Carl Bernadotte → Carl Bernadotte – A recent discussion on the page Prince Oscar Bernadotte resulted in the move to simply Oscar Bernadotte leaving this page the only one dedicated to a disinherited scion of the Bernadotte dynasty having the title of prince as a prefix in the title. The editors in that discussion favored consistency as the main rationale but it's doubtful if these titles were ever used correctly on Wikipedia and in the media. Prince Bernadotte seems to be a title that's supposed to be used after the personal name and not in a way that adds a princely prefix before the personal name. There was another Carl Bernadotte but this is sufficiently disambiguated as the other one was known as Carl Johan. Killuminator (talk) 21:49, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Support per nom. None of the other Princes Bernadotte include their princely prefix as of now. I agree with the nominator that there is already enough disambiguation between Carl Bernadotte and Carl Johan Bernadotte. A hatnote already exists to solve any confusion. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:49, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 23:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom. The results of the other discussion are clear. It's better to keep the consistency across all similar pages. Keivan.f^Talk 13:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support. --Marbe166 (talk) 14:13, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support as per nom, but not without:
• Comment there is no doubt that the title of Luxembourg nobility could be used either as e.g. Prince Lennart Bernadotte or as Lennart Prince Bernadotte, as has been customary with noble titles of that rank. The latter is a more formal version, the former more common. The other Carl Bernadotte would more accurately be a first cousin of this one, a count whose legal surname, however was Bernadotte af Wisborg. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

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.