Talk:Conrad of Montferrat

message: Conrad was de jure king - king by legal right - from 24 November 1190, when he married Isabella, who was de jure queen after the death of her half-sister Sibylla that summer. Neither was de facto monarch until Guy was forced to give up his title after the election in April 1192. Silverwhistle 22:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''De jure'', not ''de facto'' king 

message: Alberto of Millioli, chronicler, is too obscure to mention without a disambiguating footnote. Who is Alberto of Millioli? --Wetman (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alberto of Millioli? 

message: Please do not move the page again without following the Wikipedia:Requested moves process. Thanks.  Angus McLellan  (Talk) 17:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: In my opinion, it is ridiculous to illustrate an article about a real person with an imaginary picture. The painting used is just a 19th century phantasy. Not even the clothes are correct. If there is an other picture available, this one should be replaced, if not, it should be deleted because it contains no relevant information about the historical person whatsoever. It only serves to demonstrate an important motive of romantic painting, but that's another article. --Bernardoni (talk) 00:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree totally, and came here to make exactly the same point. Michael of Lucan (talk) 13:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Seconded. I have removed it to here in case anyone wants it back again. It's peculiar how everyone suddenly gets ticked off with this kind of thing at the same moment! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.241.227.84 (talk • contribs) 
Unless one of you wants to provide a more accurate painting (perhaps a photograph would satisfy you?) of a relatively obscure medieval figure, I really don't see any need to remove this picture from the article.  Even in that case, it would be better to simply keep the painting at some other point and note its inconsistencies in a caption.  This picture shows the encyclopedia reader a representation of Conrad by a later audience and gives some sense of how his reputation has fared.  Objective accuracy is important in an encyclopedia, but we should remember that almost none of the supplementary visual materials used throughout Wikipedia were created with an encyclopedia in mind - true objectivity is in any case impossible.  This picture was one of my favorite parts of the article when it was linked on the main page a year or two ago, and it was a lot more interesting with it.  I won't unilaterally replace it, but please consider restoring it! Tommy.rousse (talk) 09:58, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I assume that the theory for Conrad's first wife comes from the same source laid out in the "Medieval Lands" page for Conrad here. I believe that the use of this source (Ralph of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum, 54) is unfortunately defective. To start, looking at the complete sentence, it describes the arrival of Richard the Lionheart's party on mainland Europe, saying "qui omnes in partes Sclavoniae ad quamdam villam nomine Gazaram applicuerunt; statimque nuncium ad proximum castellum dirigunt, pacem et conductum a domino provincia illius, qui nepos extitit marchisii, expetentes." To translate roughly, "They all landed in the region of Slavonia, near a certain village by the name of Görz, and immediately they sent a messenger to the nearest castle, asking for peace and housing from the lord of that province, who was nephew/grandson/descendant of the marquis."
Looking around, a letter (Roger of Hoveden, Chronica, III.195) from Henry VI Hohenstaufen, Holy Roman Emperor to Philip II Augustus, King of France, does state explicitly that Richard was shipwrecked in Istria near Görz; evaded the local count, Meinhard II of Görz; and was finally captured near Vienna by Duke Leopold V of Austria. That much can be confirmed in Ralph of Coggeshall's narrative. However, the "marquis" mentioned by Ralph of Coggeshall is unlikely to be Conrad of Montferrat. At this point in his narrative, it has been many pages since Conrad was mentioned, and it is not for half a dozen pages more that the "marchisii de Monteferrato" is reintroduced with a brief description notably absent from the previous mention. It is much more probable that the "marquis" here is Margrave Berthold I of Istria (probably better known as Count Berthold III of Andechs), who was uncle-in-law to Meinhard. It would even be more plausible to me that Ralph of Coggeshall had briefly erred on the actual relationship between Meinhard and Duke Frederick I of Austria, as well as the latter's title, but no need to reach that far.
Anyway, if there are no obvious flaws with my reasoning, I'll delete the sentences. It would be great to know the identity of Conrad's first wife, but a nonexistent aunt or great-aunt of Meinhard is not her, regrettably. Gormongous (talk) 07:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Wife