# Talk:Philippe I, Duke of Orléans

Philippe had a naturally feminine disposition, and this was encouraged by his mother, to wear dresses, makeup, and to enjoy feminine pursuits. This was simple pragmaticism on the part of Anne.
I don't get it. David.Monniaux 23:33, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm unable to find another source for the assertion that Henrette d'Angleterre was not poisoned, that this was "disproved". The statement needs to be supported.  Rogermexico 23:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
I have studied French history for years, and I think it is disgraceful that this page does not reference his overt homosexuality.  Rarely was a man of his era so "out."  Agrippina Minor
"Put out," would be more appropriate. The poor kid didn't have a chance...216.78.100.182 (talk) 07:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Excerpts from article:  
 ***His inclination toward homosexuality had not been discouraged, with the hope of reducing any threat he may have posed to his older brother. Reportedly, Cardinal Mazarin even arranged for the de-flowering of Philippe at the hands of his own nephew, Philip Julian Mancini.. Even once married, he reportedly carried on open romantic affairs with German nobles, with no regard to either of his two wives.***
 ***Philippe's favourites, invariably younger, handsome men, would dominate contemporary and historical commentaries about his role at court. Among them one man stands out, Philip of Lorraine-Armagnac, the chevalier de Lorraine, who has been described as "insinuating, brutal and devoid of scruple". According to Dirk van der Cruysse, he...

...was also the worst enemy of the latter's two wives. As greedy as a vulture, this cadet of the French branch of the House of Lorraine had, by the end of the 1650s, hooked Monsieur like a harpooned whale. The young prince loved him with a passion that worried Madame Henrietta and the court bishop, Cosnac, but it was plain to the King that, thanks to the attractive face and sharp mind of the good-looking cavalier, he would have his way with his brother.

 ***In January 1670, Philippe's wife had prevailed upon the King to imprison the chevalier, first near Lyon, then in the Mediterranean island-fortress of Château d'If. Finally, he was banished to Rome. However, by February, the Duke of Orléans' protests and pleas persuaded the King to restore him to his brother's entourage.***
 ***Her letters record how willingly she gave up sharing Philippe's bed at his request after their children's births, and how unwillingly she endured the presence of his minions in their household, which caused the couple to quarrel.***
 ***Philippe enjoyed court life, gambling, chasing young men, and ceremony.***
'

How much more do you need???  
Frania W. (talk) 14:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

It looks odd to have a separate heading for a 'gallery' - this doesn't seem to add anything to the article. Fine for pictures to be included but no need for own heading Contaldo80 (talk) 21:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

This article lacks primary sources.  The biography by Nancy Barker is good; however, Mitford's monograph The Sun King is largely anecdotal.
There are significant lacunae in this article, i.e. there is not mention of the Philippe's participation in the Battle of Cassel (1677), which was lauded at the time.
Bibliographic references do not follow any recognizable standard and need to be edited to an appropriate bibliographic standard.  Also, there is a link to a reference to a Google book, yet there is no title or author given.  The bibliographic link to the Château de Saint-Cloud is invalid; accordingly, new sourcing is needed.
The general style of the article needs editing with some sections rewritten.  Also, the caption of the family portrait, called the Olympe royal contains inaccurate information: the work is oil on canvas, not a mural; it was commissioned by Louis XIV, not by Philippe; and, the date of the work is 1670.  The artist was Jean Nocret.
--E. Lighthart (talk) 15:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I took out a few sentences under legacy because it wasn't about his legacy at all. I hope this is ok since its not just a small revision.Bolinda (talk) 05:16, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I, for one,would like to be apprised of the resources which support that Philippe I's mother and Cardinal Mazzarin encouraged him to be effeminate and a homosexual. This seems highly implausible and even if true, should be documented rather fully, instead of being established based on a vague allusion to Dumas, a novelist.  There is a lack of information concerning the sexually charged nature of the royal court.  Whether we like it or not, sexuality played a very important role in this particular lineage - from the excesses of the grandfather and his sister, to the debauching of the legal father (Louis XIII) by said grandfather through exposure to orgies, to the ensuing pathological asexuality of Louis XIII, and the subsequent cuckolding of the king, and the "inevitable" homosexuality and blatant effeminacy of Philippe, we must realize that sexuality played a powerful part in the forming of this dynasty.  All are convinced that Louis XIII was not Philippe I's father, since that asexual personage only had sexual relations with Anne of Austria on very few occasions and even took years to consummate their marriage.  Although the parentage may never be established, many believe Louis XIV and Philippe I's father to be Mazzarin himself, as he was Anne of Austria's lover.  So, whoever is most active in authoring this article, please step forward with some references and resources.
NB
I have often contributed to articles, or made comments. Returning later, I have remarked that while my articles stand, all of my comments have been deleted from the Wikipedia database and are nowhere to be found.  Please have the decency to not delete or alter my comments.  Thank you. VaniNY

Suggest you start with the references cited in the text and examine whether you think they are robust enough or if we need to add more. Can't help you on the second point about comments being deleted - doubt that contributors to this article are to blame. In doesn't help that you don't sign the comments you make. Contaldo80 (talk) 11:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
I always thought that Wikipedia was an online encyclopedia, not a gossip-laden data base.  It would be so nice to stop wanting to base most articles of French royalty on what was happening below their belt.  Are these supposed to be historical or pornographic articles ?
Some of VaniNY's assertions are as unbased, or rather based on gossip, such as *the debauching of the legal father (Louis XIII) by said grandfather through exposure to orgies...*; *All are convinced that Louis XIII was not Philippe I's father, since that asexual personage only had sexual relations with Anne of Austria on very few occasions...* Who are *all*?  Ditto *many believe Louis XIV and Philippe I's father to be Mazzarin himself...* There are always many to believe this or that in the course of History.  For instance, many believe that Hitler escaped to S. America in 1945. Does this make it true that Hitler escaped to S. America?
My suggestion is that VaniNY follow Contaldo's suggestions.
Frania W. (talk) 16:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

There is a conflict in the two birth dates listed in the article.  Was he born on July 21st or September 21st?

All sources I've seen say 21 September.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Is it necessary to mention all of Henrietta Anne's miscarriages in his list of children? It looks unprofessional and should be removed. What do other editors say?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:07, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed them as article already mentions her four miscarriages which is sufficient.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with your change, Jeanne. Having each one listed did seem rather tedious. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Finally !!!  Frania W. (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh bonjour Frania! Yes, the list of miscarriages looked awful. I also think his death shouldn't be mentioned immediately after his birth, but rather at the bottom of the page in a separate section. Comments?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Bonjour Jeanne & Kansas Bear!  You are right about his death being mentioned so early.  As for miscarriages, unless they were of historical importance in the life of a couple, I see no reason to have them in the list of bambinos.  Frania W. (talk) 14:46, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

"Liselotte acted as a mother to Philippe's children by Minette and maintained correspondence with the two their last days. Marie Louise however would always be Philippe's favourite child."
Um... HUH? 24.189.87.160 (talk) 06:38, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Comparing the short novels for each in en:wiki[1] to more concise treatment of his children in fr:wiki

## Descendance
#### Avec Henriette d'Angleterre
Il se marie le 31 mars 1661 avec sa cousine germaine Henriette d'Angleterre avec qui il eut :

Marie Louise d'Orléans (°27 mars 1662 †12 février 1689), devient reine des Espagnes et des Indes en épousant Charles II de Habsbourg. Ils n'eurent pas de descendance à cause de l'état de Charles.
Philippe Charles d'Orléans, duc de Valois (°16 juillet 1664 †8 décembre 1666), mort en bas âge.
Anne Marie d'Orléans (°27 août 1669 †26 août 1728) épouse le 10 avril 1684 Victor-Amédée II de Savoie et devient ainsi reine de Sardaigne. Elle hérita par sa mère de l'aînesse de la succession royale britannique (succession jacobite), qu'elle transmit à sa descendance dans la maison de Savoie. De cette ligne sont donc issus nombre de princes italiens et espagnols.


#### Avec la Palatine
Son second mariage, le 21 décembre 1671 avec la princesse Palatine, Élisabeth Charlotte Wittelsbach von Pfalz, avec qui il eut :

Alexandre Louis d'Orléans, duc de Valois (°1673 †1676), mort en bas âge.
Philippe d'Orléans (°2 août 1674 †1723), duc de Chartres, puis, ayant hérité des titres de son père, duc d'Orléans, et régent de France à la mort de son oncle Louis XIV.De cette ligne sont issus (entre autres) Philippe Égalité, le roi Louis-Philippe et tous les prétendants orléanistes au trône de France.
Élisabeth Charlotte d'Orléans (°13 septembre 1676 †1744), devint duchesse de Lorraine et de Bar en épousant le duc Léopold Ier puis régente des deux duchés de 1729 à 1737. Ils  furent les parents de François Ier, empereur du Saint-Empire, et donc les grands-parents paternels de la reine Marie-Antoinette (°1755 †1793). De cette ligne sont aussi issus Napoléon II, fils de Napoléon Ier et de l'archiduchesse Marie-Louise d'Autriche ainsi que tous les Habsbourg-Lorraine.
--Frania W. (talk) 12:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I was bold enough to remove two entire sections that completely ignored the subject of the article. I did not wish to meddle with the section about "Philippe's marriage" because I did not have enough patience to understand who are all the Philippes mentioned there. Unfortunatly, articles about Bourbons and their relatives are very prone to trivial and irrelevant information. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (talk) 23:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

The ordinal seems to be mentioned only in the title of the article. The lead calls him Philippe de France and the infobox simply Philippe. If he was Philippe Ire, why are we ignoring that? If he wasn't, why is the ordinal part of the title of the article? The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (talk) 22:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I might sound naive, but how could he be homosexual if he married two women and fathered children by both? Doesn't that make him bisexual? The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (talk) 22:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

A bisexual is one who "likes" both, which his father Louis XIII may have been, not to say probably was. On the other hand, Philippe d'Orléans liked only men, which would make him a homosexual; however, as the king of France's only brother, he could not die without leaving posterity, so he had to have children, whether he liked women or not: he accordingly "fulfilled his marital duties" to both his wives, the first one, Madame Lucifer (his nickname for her), whom he disliked wholeheartedly from the start, the second whom he grew to like as a friend. Unless we know him to have had mistresses, it would be difficult to classify him as a bisexual.
--Frania W. (talk) 12:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
It makes sense but I still fail to realise how a homosexual man could bring himself to have sexual intercourse with two women enough times to father seven children. Perhaps his wives satisfied his need for women, while he sought paramours for male love. This is all speculation on our part, of course. How do biographies describe him? The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (talk) 12:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
As I was adding the following to my comment above, we had an edit conflict
- remember that all marriages of royal family members & high nobility were nothing but political moves, i.e. arranged/forced marriages where love & sexual inclination had no part -
All books & articles I have read on him describe him as a "homosexual"; I have never seen ""bisexual". According to la Palatine herself, it was quite a job to get him to fulfill his marital duties, and it was with relief that they decided "d'un commun accord" to stop sharing a bed, but I have no time to look up her correspondence on the subject.
--Frania W. (talk) 13:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. It would be nice to have that explanation in the article to avoid confusing readers. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (talk) 13:45, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
But the explanation should be succinct so as not to get into another spill such as was done with Louis XVI phimosis which filled 1/4 of his article.
I really have no time right now to do it. I trust you can do it.
P.S. In French texts, he is described as "un homosexuel notoire".
--Frania W. (talk) 14:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
This biography of Louis XIII calls Philippe "bisexual, with a powerful inclination towards ineffectual relations with men". But the rest of the paragraph is even more interesting; the author suggests that Anne encouraged Louis XIV to be masculine and Philippe to be feminine so that Philippe would not pose threat to Louis XIV like Gaston had posed threat to Louis XIII. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Problem is that labels such as bisexual and homosexual are relatively modern. People would not have recognised such descriptions in the 16th and 17th century. Instead more common terms include sodomite. I do not think it unusual, however, for a man who is essentially attracted to men to bring himself to have sexual intercourse with a woman when required. This was the standard practice for hundred of years - for many men there was little alternative or choice but to do so (otherwise face death, being ostracised, or ridicule). I also think we need to be careful about using "masculine" and "femminine" as terms to describes sexuality. One does not need to be effeminate or femmine to be attracted to the same sex. Contaldo80 (talk) 16:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
"Problem is that labels such as bisexual and homosexual are relatively modern. People would not have recognised such descriptions in the 16th and 17th century." Many words we use today would not have been recognised by people who lived in the 16th and 17th century. The article is written for 21st-century people, not for those who died centuries ago. "One does not need to be effeminate or femmine to be attracted to the same sex." Of course not. But Philippe was effeminate and was attracted to the same sex. The question is whether (or how much) he was also attracted to the opposite sex. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (talk) 16:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
He was not attracted to the opposed sex, which was not the case of the greatest love of his life, the Chevalier de Lorraine, who went both way.
He had a total of seven children with two different wives, and there is not a single mistress to be found - no bastard child, which would be the key to the enigma.
Again, I would not call him a "bisexual", but would go with the description of "homosexuel notoire".
--Frania W. (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
What does the "notoire" bit translate as? Contaldo80 (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
"notorious", "of common knowledge", "well-known"
--Frania W. (talk) 13:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
"I still fail to realise how a homosexual man could bring himself to have sexual intercourse with two women enough times to father seven children."
Well, that's royal duty for you. Think about all the married royal couples throughout the ages, very few of them genuinely loved or were even attracted to each other. I'm pretty sure their task of having to have sex with each other when they did not feel anything for one another was just as hard as a gay man having to bring himself to have sex with a woman that he was not attracted to in a sexual way. But they did it solely for the purpose of procreation, not recreation. It was part of the "job", if you will. Besides, when Phillipe felt he had fulfilled his "duty", he made his wives sleep in a separate bed. Pretty obvious that the dude didn't enjoy having sexual relations with women. 24.189.87.160 (talk) 01:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Philippe I, Duke of Orléans/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ruby2010 (talk) 19:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Some comments:

The lead should be expanded and split up into multiple paragraphs for easier reading. The lead you have now is much too compact for Good Article status.
I don't think you need to say "unknown painter" in the infobox picture's caption.
Footnotes always go after punctuation, not before. (example: The flower is green.<footnote>
"The founder of the House of Orléans, his only surviving son being Philippe d'Orléans, Regent of France for the infant Louis XV."   Awkward sentence. Maybe change being -> became?
I don't think you need citations in the lead, unless they are covering potentially controversial pieces of information. All of the lead information is already cited in the article's body.
You seem to have a problem combining paragraphs. The last three paragraphs in the Philippe I, Duke of Orléans#Birth and ancestry can all be combined into one.
"His varied ancestry caused his older cousin, the Duchess of Montpensier, to dub him the "prettiest child in the world"[9]"   Are you saying his diverse ancestry was the reason he was the "prettiest child..."?  What does this mean? Is this the reason why the Duchess is commenting?
Philippe I, Duke of Orléans#Le Petit Monsieur
Wikilink Louis XIV of France and Queen Anne
"Power thus rested with Anne and she was in full control of the country as well as of her children, something she had been vying for since their birth."  Awkward sentence, rewrite.
"It was not till 1660 at the death of Gaston that Philippe would be known simply as Monsieur or as the Duke of Orléans[10]."  till -> until.
"Reportedly, Cardinal Mazarin even arranged for the de-flowering of Philippe at the hands of his own nephew[12][13]."   What are you trying to say here? That Mazarin's nephew took Philippe's virginity?
"Aged 7, in autumn 1647, Philippe caught smallpox but recovered and convalesced at the Palais Royal."   Awkward sentance. How about: At the age of 7 in the autumn of 1647, Philippe caught...
"A year later, he was taken from the care of woman"   woman -> women.
"Despite having a household of his own, his behavior was closely watched by his mother and Mazarin, who made sure Philippe had no meaningful financial freedom from the crown"   Add punctuation at end of this sentence.
"When Philippe was 8, the Fronde began, a civil war in France in two main parts called the Fronde Parlementaire (1648–1649) and the Fronde des nobles (1650–1653). During the latter, Philippe, his mother and brother had to flee Paris on the night of 9 February 1651[18] for the safety of Saint Germaine[19] from the attack by the French nobility on the Palais Royal aimed at Mazarin."   Awkward paragraph. Consider rewriting.
"Peace having returned in 1652, the decision was made for Philippe to now move his household to the Palais des Tuileries, previous residence of Mademoiselle and situated next to the Palais Royal[20]. "   Who is Mademoiselle? She has not been identified yet.
"The next year at the coronation of his brother at the Cathedral of Reims on 7 June 1654 it was the thirteen year old Philippe who acted as dean placing the crown of France on his brother's head. All his life, Philippe would be a noted lover of etiquette and all things ceremonial ensuring that all details of which were adhered to[21]."   Awkward two sentences. Consider rewriting/rewording.
"Louis having recovered, Mazarin opened negotiations with Queen Anne's native Spain as well as the court of Savoy."   Negotiations for what? Marriage? A treaty? This needs to be expanded.
"Around the same time, Philippe met Armand de Gramont the Count of Guiche who was a notorious playboy and noted gallant. Philippe was infatuated with the famously arrogant Guiche who was exiled from the court by Mazarin. At the same time, rumours at court stated that Philippe in fact had a mistress[26] and had showed an interest in the Duchess of Mercoeur, Mazarin's own niece and mother of Louis Joseph, Duke of Vendôme, later a successful soldier and notable homosexual of the era[27]. Another lover of Philippe at the time was Antoine Coiffier, the marquis d'Effiat. The latter had entered Philippe's life as the capitaine des chasses and stayed in his household till Philippe's death[28].
Philippe's love scandal having died down the court paid attention to the marriage of the king. Mazarin had opened correspondence with Queen Anne's brother, relations with whom were fragile due to the Franco-Spanish War. The resulting Treaty of the Pyrenees[29] ended the war and was cemented with the marriage of Louis XIV and Philip IV's daughter the Maria Teresa of Austria. They were married on 9 June 1660[29] at Saint-Jean-de-Luz. With Louis married, Queen Anne began to turn her attention to the marriage of Philippe."    These two paragraphs need work. Notably, better punctuation and editing. I don't think you need to mention Louis Joseph at all unless it related directly to Philippe. You can merge the two sentences about Antoine Coiffier.
"Instead Philippe would marry another first cousin in the form of Princess Henrietta of England, youngest child of the executed Charles I of England and his wife Queen Henrietta Maria. The latter was a member of the French court and lived at the Palais Royal from 1652 till her daughters marriage[37]."   Avoid using "would marry". Try Instead Philippe married another first cousin, Princess Henrietta of England, the youngest child...    You also need to clarify that last sentence. I think you're trying to say Queen Henrietta Maria was living at the French court (presumably because her husband had been executed) until her daughter's marriage. The sentence you have now just looks odd, so consider editing it.
"Henrietta born in Exeter was given the name Anne in honour of Queen Anne and had lived in France since the age of 2 having been smuggled out of England by the Countess of Morton[38]. Henrietta lived with her mother Queen Henrietta Maria at the Palais Royal and at the Louvre. She visited England late in 1660 to visit her sister the Princess of Orange[39] who later caught smallpox and died. The French court officially asked for Henrietta's hand on 22 November 1660 while in England[40].  Major grammatical errors, and needs editing.
"Minette's very open flirting is said to have caused a jealous Philippe to retaliate by beginning to openly flaunt his sexuality in an age which was not as accepting[44]."   When what was not as accepting? His affairs with men?
"Later in March of the same year, Philippe became a father, Minette giving birth to a daughter who was later named Marie Louise. The disappointment of Minette was great and upon finding out that the child was female, she remarked that she should "throw her into the river!"[47] which greatly offended Queen Anne who adored her first granddaughter[48]. In 1665, Guiche left the court with Philippe reporting to Queen Anne that Minette had had private interviews with the dashing nobleman; Guiche left on the pretext of offending the king and was thus exiled[49]."   These sentences need rewording. How about: Later in March of that year, Minette gave birth to a daughter, later called Marie Louise. Minette was greatly disappointed upon finding out the child was female, and remarked that she should "throw her into the river!", to the great offense of Queen, who adored her first granddaughter.
"This death only augmented the court's grief as they were still in mourning for the death of Queen Anne of Austria, of breast cancer in January[55]."   Queen Anne of Austria -> Queen Anne (you have been referring to her as Queen Anne the entire article; a casual viewed might not know who Queen Anne of Austria is. Also, might be good to remind the reader that Anne is Philippe's mother.
"In the year 1668 Philippe met the future love of his life. Philippe de Lorraine known as the Chevalier de Lorraine was a member of the House of Lorraine and had the rank of Foreign Prince at the French court, his cousin being the ruling Duke of Lorraine."  Maybe mention this later when/if you mention Philippe de Lorraine again. If he is not mentioned elsewhere in the article, I recommend deleting this paragraph.
"In 1667, Philippe took part in the War of Devolution in order to appear like his grandfather Henry IV[56] on the battlefield; "Follow me to the camp and you will see how well I can fight"[56]."  Clarify what you mean here. You imply Philippe only took part in the war in order to appear like his grandfather. What Henry IV known for the battlefield? I recommend expanding further.
"While on the field, Philippe took an active part within the trenches at Tournai and Douay and had distinguished himself by his valour and coolness under fire[56]. However, Philippe, later bored of the field became more interested in the decoration of his tent. Hearing of Minette being ill due to a miscarriage, he returned to Saint Cloud where she was recovering from an ordeal which almost costing her her life[57]. However at her recovery, Philippe returned to the siege of Lille and further distinguished himself[58]."  More grammar and structural issues. Rewrite these sentences.
"But by February Philippe's protests and pleas persuaded the King to restore him to his brother's entourage."  him -> the Chevalier for better comprehension.
"Present were King king, Queen Marie Thérèse, Monseigneur le Dauphin and Mademoiselle the latter pair acting as godparents. When Queen Henriette Marie, died, Princess Anne of England came to live with Philippe and Minette leaving at Minette's death."  More errors here that need to be addressed.
The three paragraphs concerning Minette's death can be rewritten and merged into one or two.
Philippe I, Duke of Orléans#"A vacant place":
It might be useful to wikilink Mademoiselle every time you refer to her. This will make it easier for the reader.
Merge the first two paragraphs together in this section.
Why is Sophia of Hanover in italics?
"Philippe married a newly converted Roman Catholic[66] on 16 November 1671[74]."  Reword.
In the paragraph about their births, add wikilinks to his children with Lisolette, if there are any.
"Despite having no more children, Liselotte was praised as being a good and natural mother[78]."  Clarify. You are implying the small number of children meant she would not normally be a good mother??
"Liselotte acted as a mother to Philippe's children by Minette and maintained correspondence with the two their last days. Marie Louise however would always be Philippe's favourite child. In 1680, the Chevalier de Lorraine was again caught in a sex scandal this time with the Count of Vermandois, Louis XIV's own son by Louise de La Vallière. Vermandois died in exile but the Chevalier stayed[79]. The Prince of Conti was also involved[80].'""  Combine these two paragraphs. Both are too small by themselves.
"However in 1674 and 1678 he had gone to the field as a volunteer."  This needs clarification He wasn't a volunteer before??.
"The most dazzling victory Philippe carried out was on 11 April 1677 at the Battle of Cassel against William III of Orange[81], the son his own first cousin, the dead Princess of Orange."  the son his own first cousin, the dead Princess of Orange -> his first cousin once removed
"Philippe, who learned his way, went to meet them..."  Learned the way?
presumanbly -> presumably
Note: Your paragraph on the Battle of Cassel is much better than others. Consider using this as a model for the rest of the article (i.e. paragraph size etc.)
88"Philippe's famous victory at Cassel was the be the termination of his military career..."   Grammatical error.

"Barnabite college -> Barnabite College
"Regarding the battle, Philippe was noted as having showed "much valor"[11] as noted by Saint-Simon."  Needs rewording.
"Having always been unable to attend meetings of state unless unimportant..."   Reword. I think you are trying to say Philippe was unable to attend meetings of state unless they were unimportant.
"The gardens were replanned by André Le Nôtre evidence of which can still be seen today. "  Add punctuation.
Your section Cultural expansion and property seems to contain a lot of trivia. I would recommend you keeping everything in a concise order. For instance, "At the time of Philippe's death in 1701 the estate of Saint Cloud numbered some 1200 acres" should be moved elsewhere in the section.
"Saint Cloud was the home of Philippe's household as well as a royal residence. The château was where his children Anne Marie (1669), Philippe (1674) and Élisabeth Charlotte (1676) were born. The château played host to Louis XIV at the death of Queen Marie Thérèse in 1683 before he moved to Fontainebleau[96]."  Needs severe editing. I would recommend you move it to the section on the birth of his children, or rephrase it and merge it with another paragraph.
I don't think you need full sections on his children Marie Louise and Philippe. I recommend delete them and add some of their content into other sections/paragraphs.
"In 1696 Philippe's grand daughter Maria Adelaide, eldest child of Anne Marie came to the French court for her marriage to the Duke of Burgundy who was third in line to the throne[116]. The two were married in 1697 and were the parents of Louis XV[117]."   This information can be deleted/moved into another paragraph. It does not merit its own paragraph.


### My conclusion
Keep in mind this is only my second GA review, so I encourage other editors to add any comments if they have one. 
I know my comments look like a lot, but they were all help make this article better. You have too many small paragraphs that either need to be expanded, merged into others, or deleted. While the article has a lot of good content, I cannot recommend it for GA status until my concerns are addressed above. I realize English is not your first language, so I would recommend this article get looked at by a native English speaker to ensure that it flows correctly. Thanks. Ruby2010 (talk) 19:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
This article will be  on hold for a minimum of seven days waiting for the above issue to be resolved.
Ruby2010 (talk) 20:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Has everything been addressed? Been a month since the review and it looks like at least most has. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:46, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the concerns I stated above have been addressed yet. Until then, it cannot be moved to GA status. Frania also brought up some good improvements. On 16 September, LouisPhilippeCharles wrote this on my wall: "Anyway, I'll let you know when he is finished as, naturally, I would much appreciate your input". As I have had no subsequent response letting me know that the article is finished (and it does not appear finished to me), its status will remain the same. Does anyone know how long a GA nominee is allowed to sit awaiting improvements? I'm not sure. Thanks, Ruby2010 (talk) 20:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
It varies based on the reviewer. Personally, if there hasn't been work past a week or two, that's grounds for failing it for me. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I'll post a warning on his talkpage giving him a few days to fix the article, or it will be failed. Does that sound alright? Ruby2010 (talk) 03:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I left a note on his wall telling him he has three days to improve the article, or it will be failed. Thanks, Ruby2010 (talk) 15:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good. In that case this can now be failed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:25, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Final verdict: , as it was not improved on, though the reviewer was given ample time to do so. Ruby2010 (talk) 20:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


### Comments
In spite of the improvements brought since it had been put up for GA nomination, the article still needs quite a bit of editing: misspelling, peacock words, sentences difficult to read, unnecessary details on other wikilinked personages... and the fact that about 75% is a spread on his homosexuality and the homosexuality of others, such as Lully, whose article it is not.
in lead:
...was the famous Louis XIV
openly homosexual
in "Birth & ancestry":
Château de Saint Germain en Laye in the town of Saint Germain en Laye, France: obviously the Château de Saint-Germain-en-Laye is not in Marseille, then again "France"?
As such, he ranked immediately behind his older brother Louis, Dauphin of France. From birth, he was second in line to the throne of France: if he ranks immediately behind the Dauphin, does not that mean that he is second in line?
in "Le Petit Monsieur":
At the death of his father in May 1643, his older brother succeeded him as Louis XIV of France. sounds as if his older brother succeeded "him", "him" being Philippe.
in female attire or dressed as a shepherdess: is not a shepherdess a female?
Reportedly, Cardinal Mazarin even arranged for the de-flowering of Philippe at the hands of his own nephew: the "deflowering at the hands of" (?) kind of bring a chuckle...
11 May 1648, he carried out his first official ceremony when he was baptised publicly at the Palais Royal: an explanation is needed since he was already baptised the day he was born.
flee Paris on the night of 9 February 1651 for Saint Germaine: "Saint Germaine"  or "Saint-Germain-en-Laye"?
Philippe's sexuality came into question in 1658 when court gossip said that Mazarin's own nephew the Philippe Jules Mancini, the Duke of Nevers, had in fact been the "first to [have] coruppted" Philippe in what was called the vice italien – contemporary slang for homosexuality.: aside from the sentence itself, "vice italien" is not "contemporary slang", it simply meant, in proper French, homosexuality.
. After Louis' illness, Philippe was once again left to his own devices.: meaning what?
He immediately began to organise improvements to what was then a small villa. Around the same time, Philippe met Armand de Gramont  the Count of Guiche who was a notorious playboy and noted gallant. Philippe was infatuated with the famously arrogant Guiche who was exiled from the court by Mazarin. At the same time, rumours at court stated that Philippe in fact had a mistress and had showed an interest in the Duchess of Mercoeur, Mazarin's own niece and mother of Louis Joseph, Duke of Vendôme, later a successful soldier and notable homosexual of the era. Another lover of Philippe at the time was Antoine Coiffier, the marquis d'Effiat. The latter had entered Philippe's life as the capitaine des chasses and stayed in his household till Philippe's death.: text goes from the purchase of Saint-Cloud to "notorious playboy, noted gallant... famously arrogant Guiche...", then jumps to the son of the niece of Mazarin, "the Duke of Vendôme, who later was a successful soldier and notable homosexual of the era"
in "Marriage with Minette":
Philippe had previously been encouraged to court his older cousin Anne Marie Louise d'Orléans, eldest daughter of Gaston and his first wife Marie de Bourbon. Known as Mademoiselle she had an immense private fortune and had previously rejected suitors such as Charles II of England[32].: Anne Marie Louise d'Orléans, daughter of "Le Grand Monsieur" was not known as "Mademoiselle", but as "La Grande Mademoiselle", and that is how she should be referred to in article.
Instead Philippe would marry another first cousin in the form of Princess Henrietta of England,...: "in the form of..." ?
... Queen Henrietta Maria. The latter was a member of the French court and lived at the Palais Royal from 1652 till her daughters marriage[35].: as the youngest daughter of King Henry IV of France, would not Henrietta Maria be a member of the French royal family instead of the "French court"?
Henrietta born in Exeter was given the name Anne in honour of Queen Anne and had lived in France since the age of 2 having been smuggled out of England by the Countess of Morton. Henrietta lived with her mother Queen Henrietta Maria at the Palais Royal and at the Louvre. She visited England late in 1660 to visit her sister the Princess of Orange who later caught smallpox and died.: is not this going a bit too far into the life/history of Henrietta & her sister the Princess of Orange who later caught smallpox & died, since they both have their own article?
huge 840,000 Livres: no need for "huge"
Known as Henriette d'Angleterre in France, and Minette to her intimates, she was known as officially as Madame  and was ever popular with the court and had many admirers. Court gossip later said that the king was the father of Minette's first child. Minette's very open flirting is said to have caused a jealous Philippe to retaliate by beginning to openly flaunt his sexuality in an age which was not as accepting.: it's all about Minette & Louis XIV.
In 1665, Guiche left the court with Philippe reporting to Queen Anne that Minette had had private interviews with the dashing nobleman; Guiche left on the pretext of offending the king and was thus exiled[48].: this is more on the "dashing nobleman" Guiche & Minette = even if true, it is on the level of gossip.
Despite the annual celebrations at court, the ducal couple would not have another child till 1664...: ? what is the relationship between annual celebrations & a pregnancy ?
This death only augmented the court's grief as they were still in mourning for the death of Queen Anne of Austria, of breast cancer in January.: why mention Queen Anne's breast cancer?
In the year 1668 Philippe met the future love of his life. Philippe de Lorraine known as the Chevalier de Lorraine was a member of the House of Lorraine and had the rank of Foreign Prince at the French court, his cousin being the ruling Duke of Lorraine.: why mention the Duke of Lorraine because he was the cousin of Philippe's future lover?
Minette stayed at Saint Cloud as she was again in the state of pregnancy...: again too much about Minette to the end of paragraph.
Minette is best known for her part in the Secret Treaty of Dover..., which begins last paragraph of section is all about Minette.
in "A vacant place", last paragraph:
Liselotte's father, Charles I Louis, an impoverished German prince... is way off subject.
in "Marriage with Liselotte":
Liselotte was not attractive like Minette had been.: necessary?
Philippe's only surviving son Philippe would later serve as Regent of France during the minority of Louis XV. Philippe married Françoise Marie de Bourbon, Légitimée de France, a daughter of Louis XIV and his mistress Madame de Montespan.: why bring the marriage of his son to a légitimée de France etc. when people mentioned are linked to their own article?
In 1680, the Chevalier de Lorraine was again caught in a sex scandal this time with the Count of Vermandois, Louis XIV's own son by Louise de La Vallière. Vermandois died in exile but the Chevalier stayed. The Prince of Conti was also involved.: what does this have to do in article (not a novel) on Philippe d'Orléans?
in "The Battle of Cassel":
The most dazzling victory Philippe carried out was on 11 April 1677 at the Battle of Cassel...: tthe whole paragraph is difficult to read, and "dazzling" is a peacock word.
 Saint-Simon later said that Philippe had showed "much valor"[9] as noted by Saint-Simon.
in "Cultural expansion and property", many digressions, such as:
Saint Cloud remained with the Orléans till 1785 when Philippe's great grandson Louis Philippe d'Orléans sold it to Marie Antoinette, Philippe's great grand daughter, for the sum of 6 million Livres. 
Lully, another homosexual...
in "Later years, death and burial", the whole section has to be redone:
At the death of Mademoiselle in April 1693, she made Philippe her main heir.[98] From her death, Philippe became the Duke of Montpensier, Châtellerault, Saint-Fargeau and Beaupréau.: both sentences grammatically incorrect.
Chartres not having an appointment caused bitter anger both father and son the latter of which had been under close scrutiny from Louis XIV having paraded his mistress Mademoiselle de Séry in view of his wife. and following sentence to be reworded.
The widowed Liselotte continued to write to her daughter, stepdaughter, and her the Duchess of Modena. Liselotte herself died at Saint Cloud in December 1722. She too was buried at Saint Denis. The Chevalier de Lorraine died in 1703 impoverished.: sentence not necessary.
--Frania W. (talk) 19:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia
I seem to remember this page containing a list of all Philippe's titles eg. Duke of Orleans, Prince of Joinville, and all the things he inherited from La Grande Mademoiselle.  I see there is a description of titles he acquired in one of the sections but would it not be appropriate to list all his titles at the beginning?  I think that is a good idea for all articles on nobility like this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.35.218 (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC) 

We must distinguish between homosexual behaviour and the homosexual category. The binary and narrow labels of heterosexual vs. homosexual are 19th century creations. Sexual acts and there meaning to the person and society depend to a great extent, upon specific historical problems and outlooks of a culture.The homosexual how we perceive it today, as a inherent sexual category/condition/identity, is a legal and medical construction that did not exist prior to 1869. I do not say that homosexual behaviour and connected personality traits did not exist in 18th century France, but it did not have the content and meaning that the quite newly coined term has today. 

Anachronism - is a chronological inconsistency in some arrangement, especially a juxtaposition of persons, events, objects, or customs from different periods of time. The most common type of anachronism is an object misplaced in time.
For example (Ancient Greece):
Ancient Greece is often cited as an example of a civilization in which homosexuality was accepted as normal, even encouraged. This is not quite true. All males were expected to make love to women, to marry, and to sire a family, whether or they had a male lover or not. Moreover, love and sex between adult males was thought to be a bit ridiculous. The norm was for an adult male to have a relationship that lasted several years with an adolescent boy. When the boy reached maturity, he, then, was also expected to take a young lover. (Erich Goode , Deviant Behavior, p.193-194) https://www.pearsonhighered.com/product/Goode-Deviant-Behavior-9th-Edition/9780205748075.html, https://www.routledge.com/Deviant-Behavior-10th-Edition/Goode/p/book/9780205899661
“As is well known, to define it simply as a “homosexual relationship” (as was customary in the past) would be to falsify reality, attributing to the Greeks a concept which did not exist in their world. Today, it is generally accepted among scholars that an adult man in ancient Greece could with, little or no risk of social disapproval, express sexual desire for another male, so as long as the desired male was an adolescent (pais), whom the adult loved within the context of the socially codified and positively valued relationship which we call pederastic. This kind of relationship took place, then, between and “active” adult and a “passive” boy, though by “activity” and “passivity”- this is an important aspect of the question-the Greeks understood not necessarily and not only sexual roles, but also and above all intellectual and moral roles.” (Andrew Lear and Eva Cantarella, Images of Ancient Greek Pederasty Boys Were Their Gods, p. 1-2) https://www.amazon.com/Images-Ancient-Greek-Pederasty-Classical/dp/0415564042
“In Ancient Greece, homosexuality was described as pederasty, and was an integral part of life of the polis because it was a culture that allowed the norm to function. It therefore did not preclude relations with women, which was based on the reproductive order, and was based upon the division between an active principle and passive principle: a free man and a slave, a boy and a mature man and so on. Its function was, in other words, initiatory. Only the men had the right to practice pederasty, and the hierarchy precluded any equality between the partners. But a homosexual who refused to have anything to do with women was regarded as abnormal because he infringed the rules of the polis and the family institution.” (Elisabeth Roudinesco, Our Dark Side A History of Perversion, p. 33) https://www.timeshighereducation.com/books/our-dark-side-a-history-of-perversion/409986.article
For example (Modern History):
“It is important to note that the late nineteenth-century medical conception of homosexuality was constructed in France without the benefit of the word homosexual. Claude Courouve has shown that the word (homosexualitat) was neologism coined by a German-speaking doctor, K.M. Benkert in 1869. The term circulated in German medical circles for a number of years and did not become current in French as homosexualite until the late 1890s.Until that time, and many years afterward, French doctors discussed male same-sex love in ways that built on older words or medical models. Before coining the word invert in 1882, the two favored words were pederasty and sodomy. Pederasty seems to have been regularly used to refer to the seduction of boys by adult males, and was a staple term of forensic medicine, but by the end of the century was used occasionally in connection with adult homosexuality, provoking objections from etymological purists like Andre Gide. Sodomy had an imprecise and old-fashioned biblical quality that made it more popular in literature than science. Once invert began to be applied to adult males, sodomy was used more exclusively to refer to bestiality. The term uranist or urning, coined by the German jurist Karl-Heinrich Ulrichs in the early 1860s never caught on in French, nor did the concept of the third sex, which was popular among German sex reformers.” (Robert Nye, Masculinity and Male Codes of Honor in Modern France, p. 108) http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520215108, https://liberalarts.oregonstate.edu/users/robert-nye
“The sexological ‘discovery’ of the homosexual in the late nineteen century is therefore obviously a crucial moment. It gave a name, an aetiology, and potentially the embryos of an identity. It marked off a special homosexual type of person, with distinctive physiognomy, tastes and potentialities. Did, therefore, the sexologists create the homosexual? This certainly seems to be the position of some historians. Michel Foucault and Lillian Faderman appear at times to argue, in an unusual alliance, that it was the categorisation of the sexologists that made ‘the homosexual’ and ‘the lesbian’ possible. Building on Ulrichs belief that homosexuals were a third sex, a woman’s soul in a man’s body, Westphal was able to invent the ‘contrary sexual feeling’ Ellis the ‘invert’ defined by a congenital anomaly, and Hirschfeld the ‘intermediate sex’; the sexologists definitions, embodied in medical interventions, ‘created’ the homosexual. Until sexology gave them a label, there was only the half-life of an amorphous sense of self. The homosexual identity as we know it is therefore a production of social categorisation, whose fundamental aim and effect was regulation and control. To name was to imprison.” (Jeffrey Weeks, Sexuality and Its Discontents Meanings, Myths and Modern Sexualities, p. 92-93).
“The word homosexuality did not exist prior to 1869, when it appeared in a pamphlet that took the form of an open letter to the German minister of justice (the German word is homosexualitat). A new penal code for the North German Federation was being drafted, and a debate had arisen over whether to retain the section of the Prussian criminal code which made sexual contact between persons of the same gender a crime. The pamphlet’s author, Karl Maria Kertbeny (1824-82), was one of several writers and jurists who were beginning to develop the concept of sexual orientation. This idea-that some individuals’ sexual attraction for members of the same sex was an inherent and an unchanging aspect of their personality -was radically new. Thousands of years of record history and the rise and fall of sophisticated and complex societies occurred before homosexuality existed as a word or even as an idea.” (Francis Mark Mondimore, A Natural History of Homosexuality, p.3) https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/natural-history-homosexuality
The categories we create and how we think about these categories are fundamentally important—and are often open to misinterpretation. (Charlene L. Muehlenhard, Categories and sexuality Pages 101-107) https://www.jstor.org/stable/3813594?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Mind Your Words — They Have Meaning!... or may just obscure! Doctoral historian (talk) 23:18, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

There has been some dispute about considering the dukedom a form of royal office for the Dukes of Orléans. As a result, we have infoboxes that look like this...

I think it would be more correct to have it listed as a title, as I do not consider the dukedom a separate fief, but rather a peerage under the king of France. We don't have this sort of treatment for Charles, Prince of Wales.

What do you guys think? Векочел (talk) 03:41, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Векочел: I think that having the succession info box makes it easier for readers to know who there predecessor and successor were and it also makes it easier to know how Louis Philippe I was related to The House of Bourbon. But I’ll respect the consensus. Orson12345 (Talk • Contribs) 21:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm inclined to believe that these two situations are different. The title of Prince of Wales is granted to an heir apparent, but the Dukedom of Orléans (for much of its history) has been a hereditary title passed down from father to son, making it a little more tricky to handle. During the Middle Ages/early Renaissance, the duchy was attached to territorial holdings, but as time went on, it became more of a courtesy title more than anything else. Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Philippe I, Duke of Orléans/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: JeBonSer (talk · contribs) 05:40, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
Good to go for to be listed as one of the GAs.
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Nice article and good to go to be one of the GAs

The lead currently contains the sentence, “Although Philippe was open about his bisexuality and freely acted effeminately, he married twice and fathered several children.” This is problematic in a couple ways. First, neither the article nor the cited source makes any mention of bisexuality, open or otherwise. The article does state Philippe was open about his male lovers, and may have had a mistress. Inferring a sexual orientation from that is dubious. 
Second, there is no reason to juxtapose Philippe’s sexuality (whether we make claims about bisexuality or use more supported language about having male lovers) with his marriages and children. The Mitford source this is cited to says, “In spite of being one of history’s most famous sodomites, Monsieur had two wives, a mistress, and eleven legitimate children…” While Mitford obviously found it humorous for “a sodomite” to marry and father children, it seems unnecessary to incorporate that prejudice into this article by drawing a contrast between his sexuality and his progeny the way the current text does.--Trystan (talk) 22:44, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

You must remember that sexuality was not defined in the same way as it is now. Because Philippe never outright stated himself to be a homosexual, we really don't know his true sexuality. The best label we can use for the purposes of this article is "bisexual," seeing as he indeed had male lovers but also married to two women and had at least eleven legitimate offspring. As for your other concern, I wouldn't call it "prejudice." By principle, a man having a preference for male lovers would make it challenging to have multiple children, no? However, I do concede that it is not very encyclopedic, so I have reworded it Unlimitedlead (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
"By principle, a man having a preference for male lovers would make it challenging to have multiple children, no?" Not at all, as this subject and many other examples of men in history with male lovers who had children demonstrate. However, I think your rewording takes care of this aspect. Thanks.
"The best label we can use for the purposes of this article is 'bisexual'" The best label would be none at all. The body of the article does not attempt to anachronistically impose either a gay or bisexual orientation on the subject, but appropriately describes same-sex and opposite-sex activity without inferring an orientation. The lead should not do so either. It can just say he was married twice, fathered six children, and had several male lovers.--Trystan (talk) 22:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying. I misunderstood you before. I have changed the lead to read: "Philippe was open about his preference for male lovers and freely acted effeminately, and he married twice and fathered several children." However, this sentence feels very wordy/chunky to me, but I cannot think of a way to cleanly split it without having the lead sound awkward. Any ideas? Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:22, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
I've taken a pass at improving the flow of the paragraph. Please feel free to revise or revert.--Trystan (talk) 03:14, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

The very famous movie The Man in the Iron Mask (1998 film) is missing from the list. Aminabzz (talk) 10:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed uncited statements, including the entire "Portrayals in media" section. Should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 21:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)


### Philippe I, Duke of Orléans