Talk:Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé

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

Name changed from Hôtel de Condé[edit]

Name changed to more accurate one. I did some editing which reflects this. I removed the following text from the first footnote regarding the name: Hôtel de Condé would ordinarily refer to the principal residence of the House of Condé in Paris. At the time this hôtel particulier was built, Louis Joseph de Bourbon, prince de Condé was living at the Palais Bourbon with his mistress, the princesse de Monaco. The former Condé hôtel occupied the site where the Théâtre de l'Odéon now stands. The hôtel gave its name to the present rue de Condé, on which its forecourt faced. On 26 March 1770, an order in council authorized the execution of the Odéon project, designed by Charles De Wailly and Marie-Joseph Peyre on the grounds of the garden of the hôtel of the prince de Condé, who expected to be rid of the property in expectations of setting up more grandly in the Palais-Bourbon." --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion was copied from this old version of User talk:Wetman:

How is your French? The article Hôtel de Condé does not seem to at all agree with the French version with the same title fr:Hôtel de Condé. One source I found on Brongniart gives the name of house built for the Prince de Condé's daughter as the Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé. See Braham, Allan (1980). The architecture of the French enlightenment, pp. 210–219. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. ISBN 9780520041172. View at Google Books, check the caption for the omitted image.

Another one gives it as the Hôtel de Mademoiselle Condé. This one also says the building was demolished: See Bauchal, Charles (1887). Nouveau dictionnaire biographique et critique des architectes français, p. 615. (in French). Paris: André, Daly Fils. View at Google Books, near the bottom of the page.

Perhaps we should move the article to one of those names. Also what might account for the discrepancy of whether the structure still exists? --Robert.Allen (talk) 12:44, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé, with the present text moved there, and a new article Hôtel de Condé translating the French Wikipedia article on the main Paris seat of the Condé would be good. A Move, then a rewrite of the Redirect created by the move would preserve the edit history. Hatnotes would guide the perpolexed. Make the move and I'll do the translation, as my French is quite good enough.--Wetman (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)--Wetman (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

--Robert.Allen (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Naming: Hôtel de Condé and Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé==

Either one is the "Hôtel de Condé", and no distinction need be made— as long as only one is discussed: certainly no distinction was being made by contemporaries. James Parker was a fastidious writer. No doubt he followed the names as given in M. Gallet, Demeures parisiennes, l'époque de Louis XVI 1964. (I don't have it here.) Allan Braham, "Charles de Wailly and Early Neo-Classicism", The Burlington Magazine 114 (October 1972, pp 678, 671f) discusses the theatre built in the gardens of the "Hôtel de Condé", signifying the architecturally less distinguished but socially grander main hôtel particulier of the Condé. Braham illustrates Charles De Wailly's early (1770) Projet de la nouvelle Salle de Comédie francaise dans le Terrace de l'hotel de Condé, fig. 35, p. 676. J.-M. Peyre, in his Oeuvres d'architecture, 1765, illustrated a project, whether executed or not, for a symmetrical staircase in two curving flights placed in the vestibule of the "Hôtel de Condé"; he had exhibited it to the Académie in 1763, according to Braham 1972:678 note 34. As long as there are hatnotes, even the well-prepared reader will not get confused between Hôtel de Condé and Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé— as long as Wikipedia is consistent. The articles seem perfectly fin as they stand. Permit me to copy this from my talkpage to both talkpages, as my only contribution to discussion of the article titles.--Wetman (talk) 10:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, let's not rename the page again until we reach a consensus. Apparently the most common name is simply Hôtel de Condé, but since there is already an article with that title which is about a different complex of buildings in a different location, which existed prior to this building, we need to distinguish the title of this article from that one by some means. In such cases, it is common to add a parenthetical differentiator to the title. I therefore suggest, as a compromise, that we use the title Hôtel de Condé (rue Monsieur). Or we could use Hôtel de Condé, rue Monsieur. The current title Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé may be less than ideal, because it is not a very common name for the site, and we have only one reference that appears to support it. I hope other editors will provide some feedback on this issue so we can hopefully reach some consensus before moving the page for a third time. --Robert.Allen (talk) 23:15, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever title Vanity finally decides upon, minimal concern for the reader requires hatnotes to direct him to the other article. Wikipedia is a readers' guide.--Wetman (talk) 00:34, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As it was only her residence, it makes sense to name it after her! There is a need to diferentiate between Louise Adélaides home and that of her brothers. as I believe (have read within this page) the principle Condé house was the Hôtel de Condé and later the Palais Bourbon after the demolition of the former. However, i do like the idea of naming the articles after the road. I feel its important to differentiate the two for, not only people familiar with the French court and its people, but people who are not Monsieur le Duc LouisPhilippeCharles (talk) 12:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the forgoing discussion I am planning to move the article to Hôtel de Condé (rue Monsieur). I selected the parenthetical form, since using a comma might imply that the address is actually part of the name, which apparently it is not. The hatnote with the link to the original Hôtel de Condé will definitely be retained. Making the move will require rewriting of the lead, which I will do as best I can, trying to take into account many of the points that have been made concerning the various alternative names for the building, as well as the proper name for Mademoiselle de Condé. I will wait a day before doing this in order to give other editors time to make objectons and/or additional comments. Hopefully this way we can avoid having to do undo a lot of the editing after the move is made. Thanks! --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The name should be Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé. The hôtel was never demolished. It is located at 12 rue Monsieur. It was sold several times and from 1911 to 2007 was a catholic private school, the "Institut Rue Monsieur". On 24 May 1939, tt was classified Monument historique. Some of Clodion's bas-reliefs are in the Louvre & others at the NY Metropolitan Museum. When the hôtel was sold in 2008, the school was transferred to the eastern part of Paris. --Frania W. (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé as it is named on "Gallica", the site of the Bibliothèque nationale de France: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0l-wxW8ISVwJ:gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b7744262q+H%C3%B4tel+de+Bourbon-Cond%C3%A9+12+rue+Monsieur&cd=5&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6-s-G5ZWChAJ:www.chapitre.com/CHAPITRE/fr/PAINT/brongniart-alexandre/hotel-de-bourbon-conde-rue-monsieur-elevation-et-perspective-sur-la-cour-d-honne,5814779.aspx+H%C3%B4tel+de+Bourbon-Cond%C3%A9+12+rue+Monsieur&cd=6&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wkhXmkCQR_8J:club.doctissimo.fr/riesener/blog/bourbon-paris-viieme-4000231.html+H%C3%B4tel+de+Bourbon-Cond%C3%A9+12+rue+Monsieur&cd=7&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
--Frania W. (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Institut Rue Monsieur[edit]

Based on Frania's info I found this web page for the Institut Rue Monsieur. My French is not great, but it sounds like the school occupied the building from 7 March 1923 until July 2007, when it moved to another location. Am I reading it correctly? --Robert.Allen (talk) 04:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More than one Hôtel de Condé or not?[edit]

The following was copied from User:Frania Wisniewska talk 05:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC):[reply]

There is only one Hôtel de Condé, which you will also find on French wiki [1]. Monsieur le Duc has mistakenly named Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé one of France's monuments classés which has always be known by the name of Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé. An encyclopedia cannot change the name of a monument even if a Museum has put the name down in a shortened manner in one of its catalogs or website. The naming of this article should not be a matter of "google hits"" or "Wikipedia consensus" either. Would you ever agree to change the name of the famous London time-giver to Big Benclock?
Rue Monsieur article on French wiki
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dgXDvGm57vEJ:fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rue_Monsieur+H%C3%B4tel+de+Bourbon-Cond%C3%A9&cd=15&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:eaEh7iJ8_lAJ:dictionnaire.sensagent.com/clodion%2B%28sculpteur%29/fr-fr/+H%C3%B4tel+de+Bourbon-Cond%C3%A9&cd=34&hl=fr&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Cordialement, --Frania W. (talk) 04:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links. I'm not saying that Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé is not a name for the building. I agree that it is. But buildings often have more than one name, and sometimes they are the same as another building. When the hôtel at 12 rue Monsieur was built the former Hôtel de Condé in Saint-Germain had already been demolished. So there was little reason not to call the new building by the same name. Look at Parker's article, you will see that Hôtel de Condé is a legitimate name for the building. Look at Bauchal's dictionary here, you will see that Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé has also been used. I don't think we can justifiably exclude the alternative names used in these sources. We have no basis for doing so. (BTW, there is a policy against using the Wikipeida itself as a source. See WP:CIRCULAR.) And, there doesn't seem to be anything in the sources you provided which supports the assertion that there is only one Hôtel de Condé. (I will copy our discussion to the article talk page.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 05:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I seee! All i think is that it is important to distinguish the two. I'm guessing that present title is not perfect but i vote for the road names within the titles if (and when) they are moved. It wold not be difficult for someone to make a note (i thnk it may have been done already) that it was Owned by the Princess of the Blood known as "Mademoiselle de Condé", it is also known as the Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé. But then that is me!
Monsieur le Duc LouisPhilippeCharles (talk) 12:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nouveau dictionnaire biographique et critique des architects français, par Charles Bauchal, to which Robert Allen referred me, says on page 615 : "l'hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé (détruit)" while various sites (not related to Wikipedia), but to either the Bibliothèque nationale de France or Paris 7th arrondissement speak of the Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé, 12 Rue Monsieur, as something still alive & kicking, which anyone can visit: "L’hôtel, propriété de l’Etat est classé Monument Historique depuis 1939."
It is also listed under that name at "Patrimoine de France":
Is this site accepted or is it related to Wikipedia?
or even better, this article published in Le Figaro at time of the sale of the Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé in 2004, with second paragrah beginning as follows: "L'hôtel particulier de Bourbon-Condé, un petit bijou XVIIIe doté d'un beau jardin, dans le VIIe arrondissement, va ainsi être mis en vente par la société des filles du Coeur de Marie. Construit par Brongniart en 1782, donné aux soeurs pour leurs oeuvres par des particuliers au début du XXe siècle, l' « Institut de la rue Monsieur » abrite aujourd'hui encore des étudiants en BTS."
Le Monde 22 November 2008:
Cordialement, --Frania W. (talk) 13:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Frania, Great work! Thanks for the new links, in particular the article in Le Figaro which is on their web site and can be linked directly as a source. The date in the URL is 30 May 2007. Is this the date the article was published? The copy of the article in Le Monde appears to be on a blog site and is likely a copyright violation there, so we could not link it directly, but if we can find the original, either on the web or in a library, it could be cited. Unfortunately my French is not great. Does it have information important to add to the article?

I think we all agree that most contemporary sources and web sites refer to the building with the name "Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé". In my view, the most important of these is the Bibliothèque nationale's web site which has reproductions of some of the architectural drawings by Brongniart. The web pages with those drawings are already linked from our Wikipedia article in the footnotes, but perhaps they should be added to the "External links" section as well. I completely agree that the name "Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé" should be included in the article. In fact, I made the initial move to that name on the recommendation of User:Wetman. But User:LouisPhilippeCharles moved it to "Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé" and has cogently argued that the construct "Bourbon-Condé" is a misnomer which conflates the family name with the name of the house. Apparently such misnomers are used quite commonly, but should definitely not be used in titles of articles about people, since they are not the actual names. On the other hand, I feel we might justify using it as the title for an article about a building, since the name is used commonly in the press and on the national library's site. We could add a footnote which explains that the name Bourbon-Condé is actually a misnomer and why.

Frania, so far you have not explicitly stated on what basis we should exclude the alternative names found in other sources.

  • You mentioned that Bauchal's dictionary from 1887 has the error of listing the structure as "détruit", but this could be a typesetting error and does not necessarily invalidate the other information to be found there. This source is of interest because it is far older than the other sources that have been turned up.
  • The photograph and the drawing of the floor-plan and elevation which appear in the our Wikipedia article were taken from a scholarly article by James Parker published in 1967 by the Metropolitan Museum of Art a few years after the museum acquired Clodion's bas-reliefs. The images are identified in that article as a photo and drawing of the "Hôtel de Condé, 12, Rue Monsieur". This is by far the most important source of information we have for the article, yet you have not mentioned it even once. Have you read Parker's article? It's well written and loaded with interesting information, and I recommend it highly.--Robert.Allen (talk) 18:48, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Robert, I will try to answer a couple of your questions, although I cannot go into depth & research as I do not have time right now.
  • Whether "détruit" was an error by Bauchal himself or by a typesetter makes no difference, what the end-work shows is a mistake & I hope reality will win out in spite of what is erroneously published in a respected secondary source, then a tertiary one, on a historical monument that is also wrongly named, while documents at the Bibliothèque nationale de France show otherwise.
  • If James Parker used Bauchal as his source, then he repeated Bauchal's mistakes or rather "wording" of Mademoiselle de Condé's residence. And while he had in hand the original documents from the BNF, why didn't he base his article on them for naming the hotel "Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé"?
  • We should be able to find Le Monde article in the newspaper's archives. That's where I found the one published by Le Figaro.
More later --Frania W. (talk) 22:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Frania, No problem, I know what you mean bout time. Sorry if I misled you: Parker does not cite Bauchal. He did use other sources, but I'm not sure which ones he used for his version of the name. User:Wetman suggested that Parker's source for the name was very likely to have been M. Gallet, Demeures parisiennes, l'époque de Louis XVI 1964, but apparently this source is not at hand. In any case, I could live with either Hôtel de Boubon-Condé or Hôtel de Condé (rue Monsieur), but like you I'm not fond of Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé because so far Bauchal is our only source which uses it, and he has the error concerning its demolition. So basically, other than the fact that I accept Parker's name as a valid alternate choice, we seem to be in complete agreement. --Robert.Allen (talk) 02:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found an art history book from Yale University Press which also refers to the building as the Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé. It had a good quote about Clodion's reliefs, so I added that with the reference to the article (link to the page at Google Books). In terms of references which have been used in the article to support different names, we now have the following tally:

  • Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé - 1 (Bauchal's dictionary)
  • Hôtel de Condé - 2 (Parker's article for the Metropolitan Museum and Walpole's letter)
  • Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé - 3 (Bibliothèque nationale web site; Allan Braham's book; and Michael Levey's book)

So based on the sources I would now be more in favor of renaming the article to Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé. But I also think whatever we end up using as the title, we should continue to also mention the two alternative names (as used in the other sources) in the lead in bold as well. --Robert.Allen (talk) 07:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Poll on article name[edit]

I think Frania has a good idea, we should vote on the names. The proposed article names at this point seem to be:

  • Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé (current name)
  • Hôtel de Condé (rue Monsieur)
  • Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé

--Robert.Allen (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Votes are as follows:

  • YES for "Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé", (located in the 7th arrondissement of Paris), name shown on Brongniart's blueprints & still in use in the Paris of today.
  • NO for "Hôtel de Condé", (defunct in the 6th arrondissement of Paris), which covered the area where now lie the rues de Condé, Vaugirard, Monsieur-le-Prince, carrefour de l'Odéon, Théâtre de l'Odéon.
  • NO for "Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé", rare, and in Bauchal erroneously demolished.
--Frania W. (talk) 13:34, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


  • YES for "Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé", slightly preferred because of its contemporary prevalence; a drawback is that Bourbon-Condé is apparently a misnomer, but this could be mentioned in a footnote.
  • YES for "Hôtel de Condé (rue Monsieur)", less preferred because not often used in contemporary sources.
  • NO for "Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé", we only have one source for this one, and that source has a serious error in its info on the building
--Robert.Allen (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


  • YES for "Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé", (located in the 7th arrondissement of Paris), this is the common name in France
  • NO for "Hôtel de Condé (rue Monsieur)", as this name is taken by the demolished building in the 6th district
  • NO for "Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé", as this is not the common name of the place
--Ralf.treinen (talk) 17:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is Bourbon-Condé a "misnomer" when used for a building as opposed to a person?[edit]

Hi Frania, I mentioned "misnomer" because User:LouisPhilippeCharles has said that Bourbon-Condé is an incorrect name. It combines the family name and the name of the house, which is improper (even though apparently commonly done). This is why he moved the article from "Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé" to "Hôtel de Mademoiselle de Condé". So I have suggested we add a footnote mentioning that the compound name is a misnomer, since he, probably correctly, feels pretty strongly about it. I am trying to accommodate his views on this issue, so that the article won't get moved back and forth. We need some kind of compromise solution here to get consensus. I hope that this will be OK with him and you. Actually I think the combined name may only be completely improper when you use it for a person, rather than a building, since it is not the real name of the person, while the name of a building can in many instances be determined by common usage, e.g. The Pentagon is not the proper official name of the building as far as I know, but it would be ridiculous not to use it as the title of the article about that building. The proper name for a person cannot usually be determined by common usage. Such names are nicknames or styles, I guess, and should not ordinarily be used as the title of an article that is about a person, unless perhaps the name has been self-selected and this is well known. --Robert.Allen (talk) 00:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Robert, thank you for your quick answer. You are doing a nice job taking into consideration everyone's way of thinking, and let us go with the vote. Cordialement, --Frania W. (talk) 04:48, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stick to the French name for the building[edit]

Sorry when I start again to flock a dead horse, but I discovered this discussion only now. Frankly, I am completely amazed that anyone considers calling this building anything else than Hotel Bourbon-Condé, as this is the name under which it is commonly known in France. The Hotel Condé was a completely different building, as several people have remarked on this discussion page (it was the historical seat of the Condé family, situated between today's Place d'Odéon and Jardin du Luxembourg in the 6th district). Why do you invent a new name that is different than (a literal translation of) the common French name?

Anyway, if there ever will be a French translation of that page then it certainly should be called that way.

Ralf.treinen (talk) 19:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please add your vote to the poll above. Thanks. --Robert.Allen (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hôtel de Bourbon-Condé. 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) 19:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hôtel_de_Bourbon-Condé&oldid=1199770636"