Talk:List of co-princes of Andorra

Untitled
Lots of the Catalan names used are Spanished. I'll adapt them into Catalan following the next list of bishops of Urgell: http://www.bisbaturgell.org/bisbat_urgell/episcopologi.htm Llull 21:42, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * It's probably helpful to add both. --- User:Docu


 * No, this is a nonsense. Why should we add the names translated from Catalan to an other language that is no the language of this Wikipedia? I used the same names that use the Urgell bishopric. Which is the criteria used for the change? Llull 09:05, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Only an example. The first name. If you search Pedro d'Urg in Google (translated from Catalan to Spanish without reason) you'll get 8 results, and if you search "Pere d'Urg" you'll find 4.050 results. Llull 09:30, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I have restored an old version of the article, because I think is not correct tu write the names of the bishop of Urgell in castillan, see:

Pèrez 10:06, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Boris I
Since this nonsense is likely to come up again and again: "Boris I" never ruled Andorra. This was an adventurer who got himself into some government positions in Andorra, but ultimately was expelled around May 1934, and thereafter never managed to enter Andorra again. In July 1934, from Urgel, he declared himself sovereign prince of Andorra and declared war on the bishop of Urgel, and the only effect of this was that he was arrested by Spanish police and, in November 1934, expelled from Spain. This can be verified by reading actual newspapers from the time as opposed to the distortions that may be found on the Web. NoPuzzleStranger 00:03, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Roderic de Borja i Escriva` was bishop of Urgell and ex officio Co-Prince of Andorra 1467-1472, then bishop of Barcelona from 1472. He is NOT identical with his younger contemporary, Roderic de Borja y Borja (Rodrigo de Borja y Borja), archbishop of Valencia and later Pope Alexander VI. The confusion of these two members of the Borja family of Xa'tiva is part of a more general confusion regarding names and relationships in this clan. For a quick reference, see 

Arms of Co-Prince under Bonaparte
It is incorrect to show the Bonaparte family's private arms as minor Corsican nobility as the arms of the Co-Prince under the Empire, or to refer to the Empire as the House of Bonaparte. Under the First and Second Empires (Napoleon I and III) the correct arms of the Co-Prince were the Imperial arms of France, as shown in your article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_French_Empire.

David Phillips San Francisco dfp18@columbia.edu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.15.1.126 (talk) 03:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Merging articles
As a "be bold" kind of editor, I took it upon myself earlier today to create a separate article on Co-Princes of Andorra, which described the development of the unique co-principality system in Andorra, together with information on the powers and prerogatives of the two princes as delineated in the Constitution of Andorra. I felt this information belonged in that article, rather than this one, as this article simply presented itself (by its title) as a "List of Co-Princes of Andorra". I merged the contents of this article into that one (with a few changes designed to eliminate redundant information), and then deleted everything in this article and placed a redirect to Co-Princes of Andorra. However, I felt upon further reflection that while creating the other article was fine (and I have retained the info from this article that I put into that one), I probably should have asked for a concensus opinion before transforming this article into a simple "redirect" article (as opposed to what it is now). Hence, I am proposing such a change now, and ask for imput from other editors on the subject. Thanks! - Ecjmartin (talk) 01:39, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

List criteria for inclusion
What are the criteria for listing names in this article? The names listed here don't seem to match the article title, List of co-princes of Andorra, as there have only been 47 co-princes in total, but the article contains far more names than that. I propose that we blank the page and start over, listing only the actual 47 co-princes of Andorra since 1265.

As far as I am concerned, the most reliable source on the question of who is or was a co-prince of Andorra, is this page, from the "French Co-princes" page, from the Representative of His Excellency the Co-Prince of France website in Andorra. Any other source (in particular rulers.org and worldstatesmen.org, each of which is an SPS labor of love by an individual unknown in historical circles, but also archontology.org,) must bend to this list from Andorra. Since 1871, every co-prince has been the currently serving President of the French Republic. Notice that there is a gap in the list from 1940 to 1947; this is not an accident, and is discussed more in detail here. As an oversimplification, there was no "French Republic" during those years, there was only the French State (i.e., the Vichy regime) under Marshal Philippe Petain, followed by the Provisional Government of the French Republic under de Gaulle; neither was "the French Republic", hence, no co-prince. When the French Fourth Republic was established in late 1946 and Vincent Auriol took office as first President in January 1947, then the co-prince list picks up again from that point, with Auriol in 1947, followed by all the other Presidents of France ever since (current co-prince is President Emmanuel Macron).

The table in the article is kind of wishy-washy about who is present in the table and why. For example, Philippe Petain is listed in column 3 under the colored, bold heading, 'Head of the French State' and there's no question whatever that Petain was head of the French State during the period indicated. However, Petain was not co-prince of Andorra, so if that is the implication, then it is mistaken, and he needs to be removed. But plenty of other individuals in column three are also not co-princes, such as Félix Gouin and Georges Bidault; why are they even there?

Either the table needs to be blanked and done over from scratch to reflect the actual list, or the article needs a new title to reflect the mixed content contained there, but I have no idea what that title might be, as it seems like a pretty mixed bag of names. Mathglot (talk) 00:57, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Bernat de Salbà i de Salbà Lifespan
The lifespan listed for Bernat de Salbà i de Salbà is the same as the lifespan listed for Andreu Capella 75.159.130.14 (talk) 20:14, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

ill in timeline?
I added an interlanguage link for Ricardo Fornesa (in eswiki). First of all, is Spanish or Catalan preferred? (he has a page in cawiki as well) Secondly, can the ill be used in the graphical tl?Naraht (talk) 17:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * , In theory, if it were a binary choice one might prefer Catalan on the grounds that Catalan is official in Andorra, and Spanish is not. On practical grounds in the Anglosphere, one might prefer Spanish, as far more English speakers can read Spanish than Catalan. That said, you don't have to make a choice, because ill allows multiple links, so just include both of them. Mathglot (talk) 20:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * OK.Naraht (talk) 21:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Philippe Pétain and World War II
So the official list from the current Andorran government https://www.coprince-fr.ad/fr/co-princes-francais does not list any French co-prince between 1940 and 1947, but a Reddit historian has dug up some sources which seems to indicate that:

1. Pétain was indeed considered co-prince of Andorra. [Paris-Soir, 15 July 1941; https://www.retronews.fr/journal/paris-soir/15-juillet-1941/131/98837/1]

2. Charles de Gaulle fired Pétain's representative (which means there was one) after the liberation of Paris. [Journal officiel de la République française, 8 April 1945; https://www.retronews.fr/journal/journal-officiel-de-la-republique-francaise/8-avril-1945/831/2554159/2]

However, I don't know if there are any records of de Gaulle appointing a representative or otherwise acting as co-prince during the GPRF era.

Given that under the Ordinance of 9 August 1944 the modern French government does not recognize Vichy France this seems very likely to be a retroactive repudiation, analogous to an antipope or other usurper; however, it would seem appropriate to document it as such.

On the other hand, if there is any evidence of an actual interregnum, then that should be blocked out as such on the timeline.

HPA (talk) 20:10, 17 June 2024 (UTC)