Talk:Mary II/Archive 1

Untitled
It is incorrect to call Mary of Orange "Mary II." She never reigned on her own or under that title. She and her husband reigned as a single legal entity called William and Mary. He did not assume the title William III until after her death, and she was never called Mary II. Adam 14:37, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Re your argument over at Talk:Mary I of Scotland that Mary II was never referred to as such until the last 25 years, this simply isn't true. Writing in 1963, the Durants in The Age of Louis XIV refer to "Mary II, Queen of England." My Columbia-Viking Desk Encyclopedia from 1968 does the same. Although I cannot find my copy at present, I'm fairly certain that my copy of William Langer's Encyclopedia of World History also refers to her as such in the immediate aftermath of World War II. And, as a kicker, I'll note, in which the 1911 Britannica clearly refers to her as Mary II. Surely that rather seals the deal on that one, doesn't it? I can go check Complete Peerage and older editions of Burke's and Haydn's Book of Dignities in the library tomorrow, if you'd like more evidence. john 08:14, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Well they're all wrong :). However I have already conceded the point about the article titles so I won't pursue the matter. Adam 08:20, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

She was a queen regnant, queen in her own right of both England and Scotland, and therefore was Mary II of England and Mary II of Scotland.

Mary II Queen of Scotland or Mary II, Queen of the Scots.
Shouldn't it be, Mary II, Queen of the Scots instead of Mary II, Queen of Scotland? Rex Nihil


 * According to James II of England, he was the last monarch to use the style "of Scots" and that subsequently "of Scotland" was used. Timrollpickering 01:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Who was it first?
I thought I saw an atricle on Queen Anne who ruled after, saying that she was the person to join Scotland and Enlgand together and that she was the first Monarch of the Original Great Britain? Unless somebody is changing the facts, Wikipedia need to get their facts right. By Charlybrown12

When did reign in Scotland begin?
Did her Scottish reign legally begin with the Parliament accepting James VII & II had gone, and thus on April 11, or when she and William were offered/accepted the "vacant"(?) throne, and thus on May 11. The article isn't too clear. Timrollpickering 01:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Style and Arms
I think the arms attributed to William and Mary are those of William alone, the escutcheon with blue lion and billets being for Nassau, and that William and Mary together used a banner of those arms impaled with the same without the Nassau escutcheon, those being Mary's arms (cousin marriages can lead to that sort of thing). J S Ayer 02:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

A shield with all that would be cruelly cramped; a banner of their joint arms would be much more artistic, I think. J S Ayer 02:24, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

The coat of arms which I have in my resources shows the shield split in half, the left side with the arms shown on the current page (William's arms) and the right showing the same arms but without the Nassau escutcheon. It does look terribly cramped, but then again, so were Philip II and Mary I's. Brakbudy 12:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)brakbudy

William II or III ?
There's an inconsistency between the link target (William III) and label (William II) in the chronological table at the end, under Queen of Scotland. Arsine 11:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)


 * It's because his English title takes precedence. I'll amend it so it goes directly to the man himself. Timrollpickering 12:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Mary II
So Mary II was Mary II of England, Mary II of Scotland AND Mary II of Ireland?

Yep. (Although Irish numerals follow the English ones anyway, so she would have been Mary II of Ireland even if Mary I of England had not ruled over Ireland.) Proteus (Talk) 15:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Featured article review in progress
Article needs lots of references, and inline ones at that. Judgesurreal777 07:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this article needs much better referencing. Also for a 'Featured Article' I do not think it is particularly insightful, and there are some eccentric and innacurate statements. For instance, the point is made that William had 'crushed' the Irish Jacobites 'by about 1692'. In fact they had been 'crushed' at the Battle of Aughrim in 1691, though not by William in person: he left Ireland in 1690, never to return. Rcpaterson 22:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Question of Accuracy
Under Early Life, the article states "Mary's unusual weight gain was caused by her early trauma of falling into a vat of lard. " I doubt this is an actual event in her life, or at the very least doubt that it had the stated effect. It also doesn't have any references. 128.253.116.153 20:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)Des

Succession Boxes
The Succession box title English royalty should be changed to English, Scottish and Irish royalty. GoodDay (talk) 22:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Calendar
I'm presuming that the dates given are in the Old Style Calendar, and that the equivalents in the NS calendar used in many other countries at that time would have been:


 * birth 30 April 1662 = 10 May 1662
 * death 28 December 1694 = 7 Jan 1695.

Google hasn't revealed anything about this. Can anyone confirm the facts? -- JackofOz (talk) 20:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Intro
This states that she became Queen of Ireland in Feb 1689, which isn't true in any real sense. Her father remained king there until 1690/91, & was so recognized by the Irish Parliament. She was proclaimed Queen of Ireland by the English Parliament, but then it also proclaimed her Queen of France. 14:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)