Talk:Alfonso, Duke of Anjou and Cádiz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

I am not sure why Terrence Darnell thinks that removing HRH from the opening line of this article constitutes vandalism. Certainly, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) under the heading Honorific prefixes states: "(3) Styles shall not be used to open articles on royalty and popes. Thus the article on Pope Benedict XVI shall not begin 'His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI . . . ' nor the article on Queen Victoria begin 'Her Majesty Queen Victoria . . .'" It would appear beyond dispute that this article should not begin with HRH which, according to wikipedia, stands for "His Royal Highness." Accordingly, I am removing the HRH.

--ThomasK107 06:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds reasonable to me. That would be the case even if he were actually a recognized sovereign; we don't start Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom with any honorifics, for example. --Delirium 02:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish royalty template[edit]

I have suggested on Template talk:House of Bourbon, 1833-present that Alfonso, his brother Gonzalo, and his son Louis Alphonse be removed from the Template:House of Bourbon, 1833-present - since none of them are usually considered Spanish dynasts, and no other non-dynasts are included on this template. If you have an opinion, please comment on Template talk:House of Bourbon, 1833-present. If, after discussion, Alfonso, Gonzalo, and Louis Alphonse are removed from the template, then I will remove this template from this page. Noel S McFerran 14:31, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article title[edit]

On another talk page Lethiere has questioned the appropriateness of the current form of name for this article, describing it as "a largely Wiki-created & sustained title rarely used elsewhere". I recently created a page for Alfonso's brother to which I gave the name Gonzalo de Borbón y Dampierre (not using in the article title "Duke of Aquitaine" which seems rarely used in English writing). I'm not sure what I think about where Alfonso should be - but I am hoping that my opinion will be firmed up by the arguments of others. (I hadn't suggested any change myself, since I thought that it was alright where it is now). Noel S McFerran 23:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for having raised this issue in the "wrong" place. But the point struck me as peculiar because of an emerging pattern: when "consistency in Wikipedia" supports a desired change it is used as an argument, yet when "Wikipedia is not consistent" supports a desired change that is cited as an argument. You alone have been consistent about including the context "Wikipedia is not consistent, it reflects prevalent scholarship", and I agree that position is coherent and appropriate. But that context has been dropped (not by you) in other royalty-related discussions when prevalent scholarship doesn't substantiate a desired outcome; then, "Wikipedia is not consistent" gets used as a defense in response to the challenge, "But you are arguing here in contradiction to the same principle you espoused in a similar case there." Alfonso, Duke of Anjou and Cádiz seemed an obvious case (that happened to occur to me: dozens of others could just as well be cited) to affirm the principle "Wikipedia is not consistent, it reflects prevalent scholarship". Lethiere 17:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
With people who have been long dead and about whom there are lots of refererences in English-language books, it's relatively easy to do a test and compare the number of times various forms of name are used. It is much more difficult with contemporary individuals where the written record in English is largely only in newspapers, websites, and less reliable sources. Based on such sources we would have "Princess Diana" instead of "Diana, Princess of Wales". With Alfonso there are lots of sources which call him a Spanish prince (in spite of the fact that Alfonso's grandfather did not consider him a dynast). Here are some forms of names used by newspapers for his obituary:
  • "Alfonso de Borbón y de Dampierre, the Duke of Cadiz" (NYT - which doesn't even mention his French claims at all)
  • "Prince Alfonso de Borbon of Spain" and "De Borbon, duke of Cadiz and Anjou" (AP, ran in many newspapers)
  • "Prince Alfonso de Bourbon of Spain" and "Alfonso, Duke of Cadiz and Anjou" (Washington Post)
  • "Prince Alfonso de Bourbon, Duke of Cadiz and Anjou" (The Times)
There are various sources which use a form similar to the current article title:
  • "H.R.H. Prince Alfonso of Bourbon, Duke of Anjou and Cadiz, Head of the Royal House of Bourbon" (Baton Rouge Sunday Advocate, 1985)
  • "Alphonse, the Duke of Anjou and Cadiz" (Houston Chronicle, 1985)
  • "Dom Alfonso de Bourbon, Duke of Cadiz and Anjou" (Sydney Morning Herald - Dom is what it says)
  • "Prince Alfonso de Bourbon, Duke of Anjou and Cadiz" (NYT - but in a letter to the editor)
Newspapers overwhelmingly favour "Alfonso" over "Alphonse".
Newspapers tend to use "Duke of Cadiz and Anjou" (AP, Times, Houston, Sydney) rather than "Duke of Anjou and Cadiz" (only Baton Rouge). On the other hand, webpages favour "Anjou and Cadiz" (110 hits) over "Cadiz and Anjou" (only 1 hit).
Based on that data I can't come up with a more appropriate title than the present one. But I encourage others to present other relevant data from published scholarship. This is not, however, a request for personal opinions: it matters not whether any of us personally think that Alfonso was king of France, a saint, or the reincarnation of the Buddha. What matters is how he is referred to in the published literature. Noel S McFerran 22:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected on my erroneous assumption that "Duke of Anjou and Cadiz" was largely a Wiki invention. Nonetheless the research cited above found it in only one English-language newspaper. I am unsurprised to find it common on personal websites, to which Wiki assigns less weight than published newspapers on the grounds that the former are less likely to be professionally edited than newspapers and therefore more likely to reflect personal opinion than prevalent usage. In terms of books in English,
  • Burke's Guide to the Royal Family, 1972, is among the most respected royal genealogies, and mentions, "Don Alfonso Jaime de Borbon y Dampierre", omitting his Cadiz dukedom and HRH, probably because they were granted 22 November 1972, too late to be included. The title of his father Jaime (then still living) includes "Infante" and "Duke of Segovia" but omits "Duke of Anjou".
  • "Monarchs-in-Waiting", 1973, by Walter Curley, refers to "His Royal Highness Prince don Alfonso of Bourbon and Dampierre...son of His Royal Highness don Jaime of Bourbon, Duke of Anjou and Segoira (sic)".
  • John Bergamini's "The Spanish Bourbons", 1974, calls him "Prince Alfonso-Jaime de Borbon y Dampierre", and describes the disapproval of Juan, Count of Barcelona and Juan Carlos, Prince of Spain to the use of HRH on the invitations to Alfonso's 1972 wedding to Franco's granddaughter, Carmen. But it mentions Jaime's French claim and use of the title "Duke of Anjou (since 1941)" and of his son's legitimist and Spanish titles, "Styled Duke of Burgundy and later Duke of Cadiz".
  • "Juan Carlos of Spain", 1996, by Charles Powell, gives his style as "Alfonso de Borbon-Dampierre, Duke of Cadiz", discussing in detail the political struggle over the HRH granted him and the "Prince" title withheld. The author twice mentions that Alfonso's father claimed to be head of the House of Bourbon, but no French legitimist titles are mentioned.
  • In the 1997 version of her book, "Queen Victoria's Descendants", Marlene Eilers writes "Don Alfonso Jaime Marcelino Manuel Victor Maria de Borbon y de Dampierre, Duke of Cadiz", and states in a footnote that King Juan Carlos stripped him of his HRH in 1987.
  • "The Descendants of King George I of Great Britain", 2002, by Daniel Willis, lists "Alfonso Jaime Marcelino Manuel Victor Maria de Borbon y de Dampierre, Duque de Cadiz" in the main text, but a footnote to his son's listing adds, "Viewed by French Legitimists as the current claimant to the Throne of France and acknowledged by them with the title Duc d'Anjou".
In his capacities as Spanish ambassador, Olympics official, and potential Spanish dynast, Alfonso is generally referred to by his legal Spanish dukedom and sometimes, informally, as a prince. In his post-Franco life as head of the House of Bourbon and French legitimist claimant, he is styled both prince and duc d'Anjou. Unlike Prince Alfred, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and Edinburgh, it seems to me that Alfonso was much more often referred to by one or the other title than by both together: the Spanish king has never recognized the French styles, and French legitimists consider the Spanish styles subsidiary, if not disrespectful (i.e. he should have been deemed an "Infante of Spain"). Combining the two in Wiki gives a false impression that the use of them in tandem was prevalent. Lethiere 06:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lethiere lists six books, all of which could be considered scholarly. Of these, three were published before Alfonso started to use the title duc d'Anjou (but two of these refer to the use of that title by his father). Of the three published after 1975, one mentions the Anjou title. The second is a biography of the King of Spain and accordingly deals with Spanish matters. The third is written by one of the most vehement opponents of Alfonso who never misses any opportunity to criticise Alfonso or other members of his family (I've watched it happen for years). There are several other books which should be considered:
  • The Annual Obituary, 1989 refers to "Alfonso was Duke of Cadiz and Anjou".
  • Hoggart and Johnson's An Idea of Europe refers to "Alphonse, Duke of Anjou and Cadiz".
  • Volbroth's Heraldry: Customs, Rules, and Styles refers to "Alfonse, Duke of Anjou and Cadiz, head of the house of Bourbon".
  • Gardner's Bloodline of the Holy Grail also refers to "Anjou and Cadiz" - but few people would consider this work scholarly.
Lethiere cites the related but by no means identical case of "Alfred, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha". In this instance Wikipedia has chosen to use only the title of sovereignty. I don't think that usage would support a move of this page to "Alfonso, Duke of Anjou". Noel S McFerran 11:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duke of Cádiz[edit]

Let me let someone else restore my today edit. ONaNcle (talk) 21:11, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alfonso, Duke of Anjou and Cádiz. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 01:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alfonso,_Duke_of_Anjou_and_Cádiz&oldid=1198390068"