Talk:House of Wettin

Translation of titles
not sure about the translation of landgraf - would duke not be a better translation than landgrave? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halcyonicity (talk • contribs)


 * No. Landgraf is landgrave in English. Duke is Herzog. Charles 16:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

rename article into House of Wettin?
Shouldn't this article be renamed into House of Wettin in order to be in compliance with other royal houses such as House of Windsor and House of Bourbon, as well as the categories? Gryffindor 08:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. House of Windsor disambiguates from Windsor Castle, Windsor, Ontario usw; similarly for Bourbon. The dynasty here is clearly the primary usage; we don't even have an article on the eponymous castle, or the brook. Let's keep things simple, and avoid masking links. Septentrionalis 22:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * For the rest, I propose condensing this discussion on Talk:Wittelsbach, where it seems to have started. Septentrionalis 22:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Earlier history
Found on http://www.gurganus.org/ourfamily/browse.cfm?fid=5112. That this house might have been founded earlier. With 4 generations predating 900's. Ryanburgess (talk) 13:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

English pronunciation
Could the pronunciation of this family name in normal phonetic English, which could lead to quite a bit of joking around and embarrassment, also have been a factor in that name change in Britain to Windsor (besides "anti-German sentiment")? If anyone has even seen anything about that in a citable source, please don't hesitate to add the aspect to this article and/or the one about the Windsors! SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well no, because when they changed the name to Windsor,   it was previously known in england as "saxe-coburg-gotha" not "wettin".  Eregli bob (talk) 06:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hm. I wonder why. Not really though. Methinks the anti-wettin' sentiment might actually have been greater than the anti-German, in the real world. Maybe there was publicity at the time about the dynasty's actual name? SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Reliable sources, please. -- Donald Albury 13:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Leaving aside the call for RS...let's see what's going to be a greater motivation for changing the name: (a) the fact that it's clearly derived from and connected with a nation with which the UK is engaged in a massive global military struggle in which millions are killed and wounded; OR (b) if mis-pronounced it could sound a bit like the present participle of a verb connected with incontinence. Answers on a postcard please...DeCausa (talk) 16:12, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Mispronounced? Normal English phonetics will suffice. Languages are like that, like it or not. Like: "what bed has that prince been wettin' lately?". Oh, and I'm out of stamps. I simply posed a question. I believe I was (in my) right to do so. Had no desire to turn this into a sarcasm competition. If anyone finds anything published it would be great to know. Nuff said? SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The point is, without reliable sources, this is all speculation/original research, and unusable in the article. Per Talk page guidelines, this talk page is for discussions about improving the article, not for general discussions on the subject or airing your personal views on the subject. -- Donald Albury 23:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Solved now. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:17, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Cadet branches
right now it only lists extant cadet branches in the table, should we add the rest, and how should we do it? Tinynanorobots (talk) 19:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The infobox is already very long as it is, so having just the extant cadet branches seems sufficient. -- Blairall (talk) 03:18, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Use of flag icons in infobox
According to MOS:INFOBOXFLAG, flag icons may not be useful in infoboxes: Therefore, I propose that the flag icons in the infobox be removed. -- Blairall (talk) 05:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Generally, flag icons should not be used in infoboxes, even when there is a "country", "nationality" or equivalent field: they are unnecessarily distracting and give undue prominence to one field among many.
 * I say remove them, they are distracting and unnecessary, and add no new information. Piwaiwaka (talk) 06:40, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support, and I have now taken care of this. -- Blairall (talk) 03:20, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

House of Wipper?
In addition to what was discussed above under "English pronunciation" (however in a somewhat childish manner), I would like to pose the following question: Edward VII never formally adopted any surname, be it Saxe-Coburg and Gotha or otherwise. Contrary to popular belief, when Edward VII's son George V adopted a new surname, thus creating the House of Windsor, in 1917, no one really knew what the royal family's real surname was. The oft-quote assertion about this is that George V asked and was told that the College of Heralds wasn't absolutely certain of the king's surname -- not that he had none. And that statement followed the expressed opinion that the king's probable surname was "Wettin or Wipper". -- Edward VII was a patrilineal member of the house of Wettin, and he bore the title of a Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. On the page Talk:House of Hanover (Nr 15: Edward VII "takes" the name Saxe-Coburg-Gotha?) someone wrote: "Wettin derives from a comital title, that became the name of the house. Whether that constitutes a surname is an interesting question, but the Saxon dukes and their descendants used it to identify their dynasty. Surely the College knew that. They also (as I have heard) suggested Ghuelph (which was obviously wrong) and Wipper (don't know what that's about)... I seem to remember reading somewhere (I think in Nicholson's biography of George V) that more suggestions than Wettin or Wipper were on the table at the time. Including Ghuelph, Hanover and even Stuart, which made me frown when I read that." -- Someone else wrote: "It appears to me that the expert George V consulted at the College of Heralds was being meticulously careful in answer to the surname question, and was referring to some research with which I (am) currently unfamiliar, that led him to explain to the King that his dynastic name was "probably Wettin" (a point which no one's disputing) but that it could also be "Wipper". -- But what might Wipper refer to? There are two rivers with the name of Wipper on the territory of the former Duchy of Saxony, namely Wipper (Unstrut) and Wipper (Saale), but I was unable to find out what either of them should have to do with the origins (and thus the name) of the House of Wettin. The latter river crosses the town of Wippra which had an early 11th century castle owned by counts named after it. One of them, Ludwig I. of Wippra, became Bishop of Münster from 1169 until 1173 and was said to have been a relative of the Ludovingians. But it remains an open question what made the College of Heralds suggest that name. --Equord 03:38, 23. Jan 2018 (CEST)

Current head.
How can a son of a baroness be universally regognised as the head of the house of Wettin? --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 05:00, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Introduction
At the end of the introduction, why does it say that only Belgium retains the throne today? Charles III is on the throne, too. GamerKlim9716 (talk) 11:55, 24 March 2023 (UTC)


 * The statement in the lead is about the agnatic line, male to male descent. The agnatic line in the UK ended when George VI died. Donald Albury 16:08, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's confused by it remaining House of Windsor after the Queen's death. While Windsor continued notwithstanding matrilineal succession (by the 1952 British royal proclamation), Wettin didn't (by its own House law). DeCausa (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)