Talk:Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma

Title

Is this the most appropriate title for the article? All but one of the other languages' articles call her "Marie Louise of Austria." (The other just calls her "Marie Louise"). This is the only one that uses the "Duchess of Parma" title. Funnyhat 05:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

This title is a strict application of the naming conventions (WP:NCNT), which dictates this form as Marie Louise was a sovereign. It doesn't mean it is the best title though. If she were only a consort, she would be Marie Louise of Austria. How about Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma? Charles 05:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma → Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma or Marie Louise of Austria — As Marie Louise was Empress of the French, she is typically known, or at least identified, as a member of the House of Austria. Given that, and the importance of her pre-marital status in her selection as an imperial bride, I think it would be appropriate to rename this page Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma or even Marie Louise of Austria. —Charles 05:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support as nominator. 1st choice: Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma (satisfies naming conventions for sovereigns and consorts). 2nd choice: Marie Louise of Austria. Charles 05:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose the most basic part of the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) is to use the most common form of the name used in English. Works discussing her marriage refer to her as "Marie Louise of Austria". But for the rest of her life this is certainly not the way she is generally called. After 1814, she is always "Empress Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma". There are numerous biographies of this lady which call her "Duchess of Parma" in their titles; I have to go back to 1911 to find even one which calls her "of Austria". A move to include this in the article title would be artificial and contrary to English usage. Noel S McFerran (talk) 14:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment After 1814 during her lifetime she was surely titled that, but a scholar and book search on Google seems to indicate that "of Austria" is most common for dates 1950-2007, that being the form most used to refer to her. Charles 17:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

• Support for Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma - I think it satisfies both common name and and convention for titling sovereigns. Michael Sanders 12:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

This is a CONSTRUCTED form of name, never used. In Parma, she was never known as "Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma"; she was always known as "Empress Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma". "Empress" is an intrinsic part of her Parma title. Noel S McFerran (talk) 00:42, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

All monarchical names are constructed. It doesn't matter what she was called in Parma (presumably an Italian form of her name, anyway?), only that the article name fits with common name and monarchical convention. Michael Sanders 01:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Would Empress Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma not be the proper name for this article then? Charles 21:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose in agreement with Noel McFerran I vonH (talk) 06:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Nice to see you! Charles 21:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

• Support, but prefer Marie Louise, Empress of the French. The present title violates our best attempt at a convention, the "maiden name rule"; if we're not going to use her maiden name and country of origin, we should use the most notable of her titles. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment It seems that support so far is for Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma with consensus for a move at 3 to 2. Charles 19:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment An examination of the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) shows that there is no "maiden name rule" - at least not as a universal or near-universal convention. If Marie Louise is to be "Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma", why is her uncle Ferdinand III, Grand Duke of Tuscany not "Ferdinand of Austria, Grand Duke of Tuscany"? It seems that Marie Louise is being treated differently because she is a woman. She was a sovereign, and should be treated as such. There is no reason to impose a non-existent "maiden name rule" upon her. Noel S McFerran (talk) 02:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

• Reply Marie Louise, really though, is very frequently identified by, if not best known by, her premarital designation of Austria. Marie Louise ruled a duchy, but she was the consort of an empire with a very, very famous (or infamous) emperor. If she had only ever been duchess of Parma and not empress of the French, then perhaps the title "Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma" would be sufficient. Marie Louise was a sovereign, of course, but I'm pretty sure her imperial status was very, very important to her. Why is there no fuss being raised over Maria Theresa of Austria? That form of a name here, under the naming conventions, is that of a consort only, and she wasn't queen or empress of Austria. Charles 02:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment No support for Marie Louise of Austria, Empress of the French, Duchess of Parma? That would seem to cover all the bases, besides being quite lengthy, of course. SamEV (talk) 22:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

No, more "inventive" than the form which would satisfy two naming conventions: Marie Louise of Austria, Duchess of Parma. Charles 04:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

"Inventive"? Hmm... SamEV (talk) 04:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, constructed I should say. But all titles are constructions. Charles 04:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a tough one. At the Congress of Vienna they accorded her Parma and the right to retain the title "Her Imperial Majesty", for life. You make a good point, which I accept at face value, that for a half-century she's been called "Marie Louise of Austria". I say you guys should just flip a coin. SamEV (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. I do not appreciate that the article title would get cluttered. It should be kept short. Her origins and all sorts of titles are explained in the article, not in its title. Shilkanni (talk) 08:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

There was no consensus to make this, move and as such, I've left this article at its current title. --Maxim_(talk) 13:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Reliationship with Marie Antoinette

How was she related to Marie Antoinette de Capet? There is two contradicting claims about this in the article.

2008-01-11 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.208.93.34 (talk) 17:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Marie Antoinette was Marie Louise's grandaunt. The term "niece" isn't really contradicting grandniece, but it could be more exact. I'll fix it. Also, "de Capet" was never a surname. "Capet", while used, still wasn't either. I believe in her trials that Marie Antoinette was actually called "Marie Antoinette de Lorraine". Charles 17:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I thought the French royal family have been named “de Capet” as long as they have had any surname. Monarchs and their families does have surnames at least during later centuries. However, they rarely use them. I myself use them only about those which where ether not born royal or had lost their titles. Is not the present-day heir to the royal French throne named de Capet? How about king Juan Carlos of Spain? If I have understood it correctly both of them are descendants of king Louis XIV of France. So where Marie Antoinette's husband. 2008-01-11 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.208.93.34 (talk) 18:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

They didn't have surnames then, they had a house name, which was Bourbon. Marie Antoinette was sometimes given the "surname" of de Lorraine in her trials, but that can really be seen as a territorial designation, since she was a Princess of Lorraine. The present heir to the French throne uses the name Louis Alphonse de Bourbon, that is, Louis Alphonse of Bourbon. Juan Carlos has the "surname" of Bourbon and Bourbon-Two Sicilies, according to Spanish naming conventions. Kings of France and their children had the "surname" de France. None of these were meant as surnames though, they are house names, things that these people are "of". Charles 23:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Napoléon I once refered to Marie Antoinette as ”the vidow de Capet”. (This was two years before he came to power.) However, he did not know her and might had made the same mistake as me. Anyway, the surname issue is a bit of topic. I originaly asked how Marie Louise was related to Marie Antoinette. You wrote that she was her grandnice. Does that mean she was the sister of her paternal grandfather? I wounder because want to be able to express their relationship in Swedish. This language has more words for realtives than English has.

2008-01-15 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.233.151.44 (talk) 11:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

"Capet" was a nickname, the nickname of the ancestor of the capetian family, king Hugues Capet. The word "Capet" means "small cape". Louis XVI of France was named "Louis Capet" by his opponents in derision, when he was no more accepted as king. Revolutionaries made a mistake, thinking that "Capet" was a family name. It was only the nickname of the first king of the dinasty. "de Capet" is impossible. "de" is something like "of" in english or "von" in german, and is (generally) used for nobilty.--82.123.215.124 (talk) 00:56, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Does that mean she was the sister of her paternal grandfather?

Yes. Marie Louise was a daughter of Emperor Francis II, who was a son of Emperor Leopold II, brother of Marie Antoinette. SamEV (talk) 20:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

How patriarchalist. Why are people always thinking kinship via men first? While it is true that Marie Antoinette was sister of Marie Louise's paternal grandfather, an equally close and genetically more important kinship however is that Marie Antoinette was sister of Marie Louise's maternal grandmother, and they shared the same mitochondrial DNA. Marie Louise was daughter of Maria Teresa of Sicily, herself daughter of Maria Carolina of Austria-Lorraine, who was next-elder sister of Marie Antoinette. Shilkanni (talk) 07:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Royalty is primarily patriarchial, that's why. As for matters of genetic importance that is purely personal opinion. I will amend the article to reflect the double relationship. Charles 16:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Even in german, the spelling of her name seems to have been Erzherzogin Marie Louise, and not Maria Luise! reference TheRationalGuitarist (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

As I can read on the plaque in front of her sarcophagus, she's officially named in Austria "Maria-Ludovica"...--82.123.215.124 (talk) 00:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Caption of main illustration

The illustrating portrait is from Isabey, who was an imperial portraitist, and shows obviously the Empress of the French, and surely not the Duchess of Parma, as said in the caption... --82.123.215.124 (talk) 00:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Decree of 29 February 1816 on her desired Title

At http://it.wiki.x.io/wiki/Maria_Luigia_d%27Austria#mediaviewer/File:Maria_Luigia_Duchess_of_Parma.jpg there is a copy of the decree, published on 29 February 1816, stating her decision that her title must be:

Sua Maestà la Principessa Imperiale ed Arciduchessa d'Austria MARIA LUIGIA, Duchessa di Parma, Piacenza e Guastalla [Her Majesty the Imperial Princess and Archduchess of Austria MARIA LUIGIA, Duchess of Parma, Piacenza and Guastalla] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Italus (talk • contribs) 16:12, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma. 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/20120328021207/http://www.turismoapiacenza.it/fiorenzuola.asp to http://www.turismoapiacenza.it/fiorenzuola.asp

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) 04:24, 27 July 2017 (UTC)