Talk:Godfrey the Bearded

Confusion
The following statement is confusing:
 * ''In 1056 and 1059, by the treaties of Andernach, Baldwin received the march of Ename in the shire of Brabant, probably in exchange for giving up the march of Valenciennes, which was confiscated by emperor Henry III in 1045.

It originally read:
 * ''In 1059, by the treaty of Andernach, Baldwin received the march of Ename in the landgraviate of Brabant, probably in exchange for giving up the march of Valenciennes, which he had confiscated in 1045.

The confusion rests not in the date or number of treaties nor in the relation of Brabant to Ename, but in the nature of the confiscation of Valenciennes. It originally sounded like Baldwin confiscated Valenciennes in 1045 and later exchanged it for the march of Ename. The new version seems to say that the emperor took Valenciennes (from Baldwin) in 1045 and later made the confiscation legitimate by giving Baldwin Ename. Which version is correct? Srnec 18:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 22 June 2021

 * 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) Lennart97 (talk) 21:20, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

– The elder Godfrey is far better known as Godfrey the Bearded than as Godfrey III, as illustrated by Google Books search results for Godfrey the Bearded and Godfrey III. Some of the results for Godfrey III do not refer to the subject of this article but to other people, including Godfrey III of Leuven. The younger Godfrey is better known as Godfrey the Hunchback than as Godfrey IV, as shown by Google Books search results for Godfrey the Hunchback and Godfrey IV. The father and son are called the Bearded and the Hunchback, respectively, in publications such as The Cambridge Medieval History and Medieval Italy: An Encyclopedia. Furthermore, there is an inconsistency in the use of the ordinals in literature, with e.g. Godfrey IV also referring to both Godfrey the Hunchback's predecessor (example) and successor (example 1, example 2 (Britannica)). The proposed titles are therefore in line with the article titles policy in regards to both the frequency of usage and precision whereas the current titles are not. Surtsicna (talk) 12:03, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Godfrey III, Duke of Lower Lorraine → Godfrey the Bearded
 * Godfrey IV, Duke of Lower Lorraine → Godfrey the Hunchback
 * Would mentioning their main title or titles not be better? I agree the numbers can be confusing in this period. Too many Godefrids. I am not opposed to this idea of using the bynames to help. Are there any bynames for Godefrids in this period which were repeated or used inconsistently though? (I am thinking of the confusions which exist about which of the 10th century Reginars were originally really called Longneck for example.) --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you mean titles such as Godfrey the Bearded, Duke of Lower Lorraine and Godfrey the Hunchback, Duke of Lorraine? To me they appear to be unnecessarily long (as in Barack Obama, President of the United States). The bynames seem to be enough to identify them. While our article on Godfrey I of Louvain claims that he too is called "the Bearded", I could not find evidence for that. All Google Books search results for "Godfrey the Bearded" refer to the father of Godfrey the Hunchback. At the very least that would indicate that he is the primary topic. Surtsicna (talk) 14:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You are probably right. I don't have a really strong opinion either way at this stage.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC) FWIW, because it is highly cited I checked Parisse's article on the House of Ardenne and he also calls these two le Barbu and le Bossu (no numbers, but titles given for example in his tree). BTW it also reminds me that the bearder one was Duke of "Lotharingie" (both parts).--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:38, 22 June 2021 (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.
 * Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:15, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Srnec (talk) 00:06, 25 June 2021 (UTC)