Talk:Isabella Clara Eugenia

}}

To translate
From Germany:. Tnx in advance. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 00:09, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * added a lot of the content. The article is mostly detailed family relations and youth, the latter part in the netherlands is a bit skipped over. Hence I expanded the youth and marriage, and kept the netherland part from the previous version. A check for the clarity of my writing would be appreciated. -- Chris 73 Talk 02:01, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

Wedding date

 * Also, the wikipedia article gave her wedding day as May 6, 1598, whereas a few sources I checked gave it as May 6, 1599. One site states that it was planned for 1598, but was delayed for 7 months due to the death of her father. I have changed the date to 1599, but would be glad if someone could check. -- Chris 73 Talk 07:54, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

gives 1599. So does and. That seems fairly conclusive, although they all seem to give April 18 as the day. john k 08:22, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * According to the Wikipage Archduke Albert (1559-1621), he married Isabella Clara Eugenia on 1599 April 18, not May 6. One of the wedding dates is wrong.  Perhaps the earlier date was the engagement ? -- PFHLai 21:37, 2005 Apr 17 (UTC)


 * Perhaps different calendars were used (Gregorian calendar vs Julian calendar)? I have witnessed such discrepancies in articles from that time period. A software - or a website - that could compare if those dates refer to the same day could be useful here - perhas this will help . --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:06, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

April 18 and May 6 would not be Julian/Gregorian equivalents. At any rate, as Catholics in a Catholic country, they would have used Gregorian dates. john k 03:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The engagement was May 6 1598. The marriage in Valencia (after a marriage by procuration in Ferrara) was on April 18 1599. Richardot (talk) 16:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Ready for Prime-Time?
This article reads well, but being a relative newbie I don't know if that means it's ready for Featured Article status, and I don't yet know how to go about nominating it for such. Anyone knowledgeable about this entry know whether it's ready for that yet? Longshot14 18:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Always start with Peer review prior to FAC process. Lack of references is one of the things that definetly need to be addressed before FAC (and PR, too).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Did she have children or not?
Could you please correcte the two completely contradictory paragraphs about her marriage and children?

She did not, though there were a few miscarriages. Richardot (talk) 16:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Isabella as queen of France
"...Quand nous étions élèves, nous avons appris qu'en l'an 1589 le Parlement de Paris, Cour d'appel de ce temps-là, rendit une décision estimant que la souveraine légitime de la France était l'Infante d'Espagne Isabelle-Claire-Eugénie, fille du roi d'Espagne Philippe II et de la pricnesse Élisabeth de France." an extract. Marrtel 03:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Inconsistencies
This article is often inconsistent with that of her husband Archduke Albert. A few examples: date of the reign, question of sovereignty, presumed offspring (which there wasn't), etc. It gives no references. Richardot (talk) 16:18, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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. 

The result of the move request was: page not moved: majority for "oppose" and this discussion has run 41 days. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:01, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia of Spain → Isabella Clara Eugenia — According to #5 Naming conventions (royalty and nobility), "European monarchs whose rank is below that of King (e.g., Grand Dukes, Electors, Dukes, Princes), should be at the location {Monarch's first name and ordinal}, {Title} of {Country}". However, I believe that Isabella Clara Eugenia is quite enough and that, ignoring the fact that it would be hard to decide which of her duchies and counties was the most important, something like Isabella Clara Eugenia, Duchess of Luxembourg would be unneccessarily long but still better than the present title. The current title is not only unneccessarily long; it undermines her status as sovereign by relegating her to the rank of a mere infanta. Besides, this article would not be the first about a Habsburg sovereign whose title consists of the subject's name(s); the article about the only other female Habsburg sovereign is titled Maria Theresa. Surtsicna (talk) 18:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support, certainly the present title misrepresents what she was most notable for. Perhaps adding "Duchess of Luxembourg" to the proposed title would make some sense, though - I don't think "Isabella Clara Eugenia" is as well-known a name as "Maria Theresa".--Kotniski (talk) 09:54, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose, see Infanta Leonor of Spain as format. Person is also not known enough to run as a simple "Isabella Clara Eugenia", she was neither queen nor empress. Gryffindor (talk) 19:14, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You oppose citing Infanta Leonor of Spain as format and ignoring the format used by the articles about Elisabeth, Duchess of Luxembourg and all the other predecessors and successors of Isabella Clara Eugenia? The current title is against Wikipedia conventions, so it is pointless to cite them as reasons for opposing the request. She is the only Isabella Clara Eugenia who ever existed; thus, her unique name would make a proper title on its own. If not, Isabella Clara Eugenia, Duchess of Luxembourg would still be better than the present title that goes against both WP:Common name and WP:Naming conventions (names and titles). Surtsicna (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Common Name. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  08:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose not well-known enough just with forenames. This is her common name. Noel S McFerran (talk) 11:32, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Undiscussed Move
Can we discuss this move before we move it? Surtsicna has moved it to the present title of Isabella Clara Eugenia, Duchess of Luxembourg when Duchess of Luxembourg was never the main title of the woman. If no one objects I am going to move this back so we can have a proper discussion and request move. If not Isabella Clara Eugenia why not Isabella Clara Eugenia (Netherlands), Isabella Clara Eugenia, Sovereign of the Netherlands, Isabella Clara Eugenia, Ruler of the Netherlands, or something along that line that includes all the other counties and duchies? --Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 00:49, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Request Move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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. 

uest was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Isabella Clara Eugenia, Duchess of Luxembourg → Isabella Clara Eugenia — Luxembourg was not any more important or powerful than any of the other states within the Habsburg Netherlands. The Duchy of Brabant was larger than Luxembourg. The Spanish Wikipedia article on her is under Isabella Clara Eugenia. She is the only person named Isabella Clara Eugenia in history.--Queen Elizabeth II&#39;s Little Spy (talk) 01:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * As a matter of fact Luxembourg was less powerful than Brabant of Flanders in the early seventeenth century. It was huge (almost three times the size of the present grand duchy) but sparsely inhabited. An additional reason for not using the title is that under the Act of Cession of 1598 it was stipulated that it would be used to designate the son and heir of the archdukes (very much like Duke of Cornwall in English usage).Richardot (talk) 09:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Support for simplicity and precision. Srnec (talk) 15:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - certainly better than Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia of Spain, which undermines her monarchical status by relegating her to the rank of a mere princess. Surtsicna (talk) 16:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Kauffner (talk) 14:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. She is best known as Isabel Clara Eugenia, quite and simple. The Luxembourg is merely confusing. Buchraeumer (talk) 18:02, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Children
Did she have three children: Philip, Albert, Anna Mauritia, who died young? --The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2013 (