Talk:Hugh Capet

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2021 and 18 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Daniel Phantom.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 February 2021 and 30 March 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wobbegong027.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Contradictory Section
The article currently reads:
 * While Hugh Capet's military power was limited and he had to seek military aid from Richard I of Normandy, his unanimous election as king gave him great moral authority and influence. Adémar de Chabannes records, probably apocryphally, that during an argument with the Count of Auvergne, Hugh demanded of him: "Who made you count?" The count riposted: "Who made you king?"[9].

The riposte points to the exact opposite idea of the first sentence: that as a nonhereditary king, Hugh had less moral authority and influence. Should the entire section be removed? or which side should the article come down on? -114.91.67.180 (talk) 14:44, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

comment
As I would suggest the name might well be written as "Huges Ier/", that is Hugh the First?, but possibly "Ier" did mean more than "premier?" As, stated in another of my suggestions, there could be some mistaken history involved, and therefor, Huges or Hughes "Capet" could mean the "Big head" or "Swollen head", or even "Pompus?", and as such might even have been written as "The Large" or even "the great?" This would, of course, tend to merge the later "Magnus" with the elder!69.92.23.64 (talk) 02:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes

As I understand it, Hugh Capet's father Hugh Magnus married Hedwige of Saxony, sister of Emperor Otto. Therefore as a nephew of Emperor Otto he was perhaps in a position to exercise greater influence than Lothair. If your information indicating Hugh Capet married the daughter of Otto is correct, please clarify name of daughter and which of Otto's wives/significant others was the mother.

I also have sources that indicate Hugh Capet and Adelaide of Aquitaine (Poitou)had a daughter, Hedwig. Is she the same as one of the four you have identified? If so, please let me know who.
 * Yes, Hugh and Adelaide had a daughter Hedwig who married Rainier IV of Hainault.Cosal 23:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I have problems with this article. It seems to be factual, even though it's sourceless. However, this might not even be considered to be an article for a printed encyclopedia, like World Book. In my opinion, it's more in the style of a CIA factbook than of a narrative. It's not a bad article at all! There are just a couple of points I think should be brought up:


 * 1. Hugh Capet was crowned because the nobles thought him to be too feeble-minded to rule (thus enabling them to take true control.)
 * 2. In reality, this guy was one politic bloke. He ruled by a giant beaurocracy. This can be seen in contrast to medieval England's Henry II, who developed common law a century or so later.


 * I don't have sources on my person, but I believe that that's what I read. (from a student, no one especially authoritive, but I have my sources!)207.241.244.1 17:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

So he's basically France's version of King Rudolf I of Germany...heh. Anywya, shouldn't the title be "Hugh I of France", in accordance to naming policy? -Alex 12.220.157.93 05:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC).

I'm quite interested to know how it happened that Hugh Magnus was said to be the most powerful man of his time in "France" but his son, as stated in this article as in other sources, had such a limited range of power. Can anybody explain that? Kokosnuss 08:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

FRom above is this quote; "Yes, Hugh and Adelaide had a daughter Hedwig who married Rainier IV of Hainault.Cosal 23:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)" I would suggest that "Rain-ier" meant, at best "First Ruler!" "Rain" is but a misspelling of Reign, etc., and "ier" reportedly meant nothing more than "the first" or "Premier!" Maybe one of you should check this out?69.92.23.64 (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2010 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes

comment
This page makes no mention of daughter Adele, however page on 'Robert II of France' references daughter 'Advisa, ... not to be confused with her aunt Adele, who married Count Renaud I of Nevers', Robert II's pages is linked to 'Hugh Capet of France' as father. A page for 'Adele of France' and one for 'Renauld I, Count of Nevers' also link to 'Hugh Capet of France' as father and father-in-law. Can someone clarify relationships?

Andaleen 18:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Image
Does anyone have references for the image now illustrating the article? It's such a stylistic anachronism, it should be dated and located lest anyone think this is somehow a "portrait" of the real Hugh Capet. RodC 22:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right, the image was completely anachronistic and inaccurate. I removed it. See also Talk:Henry I of France. Hardouin 00:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I have a very old broken album full of cigarette-size cards showing kings of France. Most of these are accompanied by cards with handwritten text (in italian I think). Do you think any of these might be suitable for inclusion in wikipedia pages. If so I will need some advice on how to do this. I am going to try to show you my cards for Hugh Capet in this message. Not sure if this will work though...



Well, after about five attempts I finally understood the process. Unfortunately, I do not know where this album originated from but it has the appearance of being very old indeed and therefore I would think that any copyright has expired. That is not conclusive I know. So, if it is not acceptable I will understand. I should just add that these are not cigarette cards although of that size. They have no printing on the reverse, and although I have reproduced in grey tone, the originals are sepia.
 * Stop removing the picture, whoever it is. It may be anachronism but it's the only thing we have unless someone wants to find a coin from this period.  So since it anachronism to put a picture on this article, is it anachronism to put any picture on the article Jesus since there were never any potrait of Jesus when he was alive? --Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Move.-- Hús  ö  nd  23:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Hugh Capet of France → Hugh Capet — Most common name Michael Sanders 22:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * "Hugh Capet of France" gets 3830 results, "Hugh Capet" gets 61200. "Hugh Capet" is entirely unambiguous, so 'of France' is unnecessary Michael Sanders 22:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * "Hugh of France" gets 15500. That name would also be more confusing than the commonly known and used 'Hugh Capet'. Michael Sanders 11:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Add  # Support   or   # Oppose   on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~ .  Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.


 * Support as nominator. Michael Sanders 22:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. The current title is not consistent with the rest of the French monarchs anyway, so unless anybody wants "Hugh of France," this is a big improvement. Srnec 03:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - sensible move to an improved title. TerriersFan 01:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support you rarely see the "of France" part attached. 205.157.110.11 23:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Etymology of Capet
We should add something about the etymology of Capet - doesn't it simply refer to Hugh's habit of wearing a cape? David.Monniaux (talk) 13:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest that it means "great headed" or "big head" or merely "Ier", that is the first, or greatest!69.92.23.64 (talk) 02:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes

I doubt "Capet" refers to anything particular about Hugh because it was first applied in 1200. I think it *might* have been applied to refer to his being the first (at the head) of his family's continuous line of rulers. But more likely, it refers to the cape of St. Martin at the abbey at Tours, where his grandfather Robert was lay abbot. That cape was a relic which symbolized the ideal Christian soldier.24.5.224.13 (talk) 22:45, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Ancestors listed improperly
His mother and his father's mother are listed as the same person: Hedwig of Saxony. Only one of them (the mother) matches the linked article in terms of parents and husband. Either the same title is given to two people (possible) in which case that should be clarified and one of the links should be changed so they don't link to the same article. Or one of them (most likely the father's mother) is listed improperly. Seeing as how this is one of the "On this day..." articles for today (3 July), I think it should be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.58.168.163 (talk) 08:04, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Death?
I don't see much about how Hugh Capet died.. did I miss it, or is it not known or not included in the article? PutinOnTheRitz (talk) 16:09, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Consistency
Could we please have a consistent spelling of Reims/Rheims? --Martin Wyatt (talk) 21:33, 4 July 2019 (UTC)