Talk:Appanage

message: I noticed that the Mongolian section could use a couple of things. One would be a statement of the principles of appanage creation in Mongolian culture. I seem to remember from reading about Genghis Khan that although he rewarded many people, appanages were traditionally assigned to the youngest son. But I am not an expert on this. Another thing the section could use is some massaging in the direction of native English. I would help with that except I'm not always confident of the contributors' intent. This is my first attempt to use a Talk page so hopefully I'm conforming to the conventions...
64.25.81.134 (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, on thinking about it, I'm fairly certain that Vendôme was not an apanage.  (Btw, isn't "apanage" the proper spelling?).  I would add, though, that after Francis I's time apanages continued to be granted, they just ceased to have any connotation of sovereignty.  For instance, iirc, the future Henry III was given an apanage during Charles IX's reign, as was his own younger brother François, duc d'Anjou, during Henry's own reign.  Gaston, younger brother of Louis XIII was granted an apanage, and so was Philippe, younger brother of Louis XIV.  Finally, Louis Stanislas and Charles, younger brothers of Louis XVI, were given apanages.  This no longer implied semi-sovereign rule, as it had previously, but as I understand it these were still apanages. There's a good discussion of apanages at François Velde's normally reliable site.  It lists 7 apanages created in the early modern period. I'm going to add material from this to the article. john k 19:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think appanage is the English spelling, apanage is the French spelling. Adam Bishop 21:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Appanage" feels more like an archaic English spelling to me, in the same way that "Hapsburg" is an English spelling, but we don't generally use it anymore.  Both terms appear in both American Heritage and wordnet, although American Heritage gives "appanage" first.  OED lists "apanage" as the first spelling (although this may be just alphabetical order). Given that this article is almost entirely about the French usage, I'd prefer to just use the French spelling, which also is a valid English spelling.  Another question - is it appropriate to refer to royal dukedoms as apanages?  I'd say no.  An apanage involves a grant of land.  The Duchy of Cornwall is arguably an apanage.  But, at least since the end of the middle ages, the other royal dukedoms have not involved any actual grant of land that I'm aware of. john k 22:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: :
I removed this paragraph from the lead section.  The first sentence describes something other than the overall topic of the article; if monetary allowances to royals are called appanage in Scandinavia, there could be a later section for Other uses of the term.  Translations, even in Mongolian, don't belong in the lead section.
I also removed this sentence: "Under the rules of heraldry, only the head of the family may bear the undifferenced (plain) arms."  That rule was never universal, and I think I found a slightly better way to bring in the relevance of heraldic cadency. —Tamfang (talk) 00:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed a paragraph 

message: That's a term I hadn't seen before.  Sure it shouldn't be Bragantine (after Bragança)? —Tamfang (talk) 06:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brigantine Portugal 

message: I do not understand this segment and I find it likely that others wouldn't understand it either.
The king who created the most powerful appanages for his sons was John II of France. His youngest son, Philip the Bold, and founded the second Capetian House of Burgundy in 1363. By marrying the heiress of Flanders, Philip also became ruler of the Low Countries.
If someone could help clarify it, that would be fantastic.
Alex the Nerd (talk) 17:15, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you clarify which segment you refer to?--Quisqualis (talk) 17:28, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing segment.