Talk:Garsenda, Countess of Forcalquier

The poem
Can anyone do a better translation of the poem? The translation that's there doesn't really say the same thing -- the words were changed to get the rhyme in English. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 22:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The translation is from a reliable source and is to be preferred, but there is no reason a more literal one of our own couldn't be added. Srnec (talk) 03:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Second Marriage?
I have a source which indicates that she was the mother of Gaston VII, Viscount of Béarn from a second marriage, presumably to Guillermo II de Montcada. However, both Gaston and Guillermo show that the Garsenda in question was the daughter of this woman by the only husband shown here. I don't see the sourcing for that data on those pages, but I'm reluctant to alter them based on a passing reference in a book that is not about her. 1bandsaw (talk) 14:08, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * "Guillermo II" (or Guillem de Montcada III) did leave a widow named Garsenda according to James C. Shideler, Medieval Catalan Noble Family: The Montcadas, 1000-1230 (University of California Press, 1983), p. 192. But that's all he says. There is no other indication that she was the countess of Forcalquier.
 * Joaquim Miret i Sans (1902), "La casa de Montcada en el Vizcondado de Bearn", Boletín de la Real Academia de Buenas Letras de Barcelona 1 (6): 280–303, argues that the Garsenda who married the Montcada viscount of Béarn was the daughter of the countess of Forcalquier and the count of Provence. He quotes a document from 1223, which refers to R. Berenguer comiti et Marchio Provincie et Folcalquer et Garcende comitisse sorori vestre ... quam fecimus Garcende comitisse uxori nostre (R. Berengar count and margrave of Provence and Forcalquier and Countess Garsenda your sister ... when we made Countess Garsenda our wife).
 * Likewise Jaume Cirera i Prim (1954), "Filiación de los Montcada que asistieron a la conquista de Mallorca", Memòries de la Reial Acadèmia Mallorquina d'Estudis Genealògics, Heràldics i Històrics 2 (1–4): 101–12, makes Garsenda of Béarn a daughter of Garsenda of Sabran. Chronologically this makes more sense, especially if the marriage of 1223 had issue. Srnec (talk) 17:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Why isn't her genealogy and the "House of Garsenda" relevant?
This was sourced, and from a feminist perspective, this was a "hidden matrilineal dynasty" of European royalty, which hitherto has been seen solely in a patriarchal way.

As far as the source goes, UsefulCharts in Youtube is a reliable source, but all of the entries for royal descendants can also be sourced through Wikipedia as well. Links to the articles for these individuals were provided. If you need another source, I can provide the link to WikiTree, which also has links to primary sources.

The mitochondrial DNA of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh which validated the mitochondrial DNA and identities of the bodies of Empress Alexandra of Russia and her children was a highly reported study in 2009, and is in fact also mentioned in Wikipedia.

The fact that the mitochondrial DNA is listed allows a different way of tracing the unknown history of women in Europe, and other lineages.

How many Wikipedia articles are there about incredibly obscure patrilineal "Houses" and dynasties? Not one for a a matrilineal dynasty?

Any other justification for removing this, aside from erasing women's history in Europe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeogenetics (talk • contribs)


 * I disagree that UsefulCharts and WikiTree are reliable sources. I created this page in 2008, so I hardly need a lecture about women's history from you are any other of the thousands of readers who just learned about her existence from YouTube. This article is about an individual woman, not a made-up "matrilineal" dynasty. The fact that Garsenda has numerous royal descendants is neither here nor there: she is hardly the only one. Indeed, isn't every one of her descendants also a descendant of Josserande de la Flotte? What does it say about "women's history" that her actual life and poetry drew an average 20 views a day but now that people are informed that she had powerful male descendants it is up to 1500? Srnec (talk) 00:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * And powerful female descendants - they include Queen Victoria and Catherine the Great. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No, you don't have academic journal articles or book sources, about a "House of Garsenda" - Useful Charts on YouTube doesn't cut it. Wikipedia can't cite itself for the reason that anyone can edit it (see Reliable sources). As for your comment about Wikipedia not having any articles on matrilineal dynasties, yes we do - Rain Queens for example. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Look the amount of talk about the "House of Garsenda" shows it has gained some relevance and should be referenced here in some way. It is certainly of interest and the fact she has these descendants is not the issue of dispute. I'd suggest those who keep removing the mentions of this fact write up their own section on it they are happy with and just stop this back and forth.104.244.208.228 (talk) 15:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "Talk" does not encyclopedic material make, and the interest is already beginning to wane. By next week it will be mostly forgotten, but Srnec will likely be able to look forward to his article getting an average of 40 views a day rather than just 20. Ribbet32 (talk) 20:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

The talk means that this information is relevant to people, there should be at least a section stating there is a claim. It has become part of her story now. Even if it is wrong it is a major claim made that deserves reference, many articles include reference to claims. I'd just include a section called something like "claimed descendents" mentioning that this has been claimed, the existence that the claim has been made and seen by large numbers of people is not up for debate.104.244.208.36 (talk) 16:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)