Talk:Duke of Normandy

message: I'm moving this to Duke of Normandy. --Jiang
: ... where, indeed, I have now moved it back to, and made List of Dukes of Normandy and Dukes of Normandy redirects. Given that this is the only talk page of the three, I will move this, too.
: James F. (talk) 18:49, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving

message: Please see  ... if article regulars agree that the removed material was POV please feel free to revert my reversion. ++Lar: t/c 01:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  rolled back some changes 

message: CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN HOW ROLLO "EXECUTED 100 CHRISTIANS UPON HIS DEATH"?  HOW DOES SOMEONE EXECUTE ANYTHING AFTER HE DIES? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.205.40.3 (talk • contribs)   20:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Executed 100 Christians after his death

message: Why is the current holder of this title, Queen Elizabeth II, styled as the Duke of Normandy instead of the Duchess of Normandy? Ronnotel (talk) 15:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: never mind - I read the paragraph above. Ronnotel (talk) 15:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Which is nonsense, but never mind ... —Tamfang (talk) 05:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: newbie question

message: Can someone please provide a source for the assertion that James II was created Duke of Normandy by the King of France? Opera hat (talk) 14:06, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  James II 

message: Although Queen Elizabeth is the current Duke of Normandy, she is not a person that readers would commonly associate with the title, since the title was of far greater significance 800 or 1000 years ago than it is today, and the article text (as opposed to the lists) deals with the history of the Dukes from 911 to 1660.  I propose to return to the image :Image:Rollo statue in falaise.JPG, which was at the top of the article until recently.  The image :Image:William I, Lichfield Cathedral.jpg would be an acceptable alternative.  Scolaire (talk) 08:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is an unwritten rule to have the current holder of the title at the top of the page. I agree that it would be a good idea to have a historic image also. Perhaps further down would be a good idea? --Cameron* 17:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But even if it is a current title, it is really only of historical interest.  I'd be more in favour of having the historic image at the top and the picture of the Queen further down.  Also, although it is a lovely photograph, I find it somewhat out of keeping with the subject of the article.  :Image:Elizabeth II, Buckingham Palace, 07 Mar 2006 crop.jpeg, though it is of far inferior quality, has much more of a "current holder of the title" feel to it.  Scolaire (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The same could be said for most titles. ;) --Cameron* 15:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid I have no idea what you mean by that!  Monarchy of the United Kingdom is an article about the current status of the monarchy, with an added history section; the same is true of President of the United States, and any other article about a position or title that is likely to be in the news on a regular basis.  This here is a history article, which effectively ends in 1660, with a very brief mention in the lead that the title still exists and Queen Elizabeth is the current holder.  The same can't be said of any other article I can think of.  Scolaire (talk) 17:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, I agree with what you've said there. But do you find this article any more history orientated than, say, List of English monarchs? --Cameron* 19:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Now here's something I didn't know. The British monarchs continue to hold the title Duke of Normandy, interesting. GoodDay (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Cameron, again I'm not sure what you're trying to say there.  List of English monarchs is a history article and it doesn't have anybody's picture on the top.  Maybe this one shouldn't either?  Does the Duke of Normandy have his/her own coat of arms?  Maybe that's what belongs there.  At any rate, GoodDay just made my point for me there - the great majority of readers don't associate "Duke of Normandy" with Queen Elizabeth.  Scolaire (talk) 06:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've found the arms of the Duchy at :Image:Blason duche fr Normandie.svg. Per your comments below I'm being bold and adding it.  Scolaire (talk) 07:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image of Queen Elizabeth 

message: That section, should be divided into List of English Dukes of Normandy & List of British Dukes of Normandy, IMHO. GoodDay (talk) 19:51, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! ;) Next time, be bold! :) Best, --Cameron* 19:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of English & British Dukes? 

message: :   "The equally widely-held belief that [the British monarch] is Duke of Normandy is even more fantastic [than that of Lancaster]. All claims to that style on the part of the English Crown were surrendered when, by the Treaty of Paris in 1259, Henry III recognised the French conquest of the Duchy, and they have never been resumed. Even had the title of Duke of Normandy survived apart from actual possession and sovereignty of the Duchy, there could be no lineal claim to it by the present Royal House. The vicissitudes of the descent of the English Crown have been such that any such shadowy claim would lie elsewhere than in this Royal House.
:   "Patriotic inhabitants of the Channel Islands – or the Norman Isles, as that stalwart islander the late Lord Portsea preferred to call them – will stoutly resist this doctrine, but I fear their case is hopeless. The Channel Isles are an apanage of the English and not of the Norman ducal Crown. They are a remnant of the Duchy retained by the English Crown when the sovereignty of the mainland portion of the Duchy was conceded to France, but their retention implies no right or claim to the ducal style."
:: —British Titles by Valentine Heywood, 1951; pp.5–6
::—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamfang (talk • contribs) 04:09, 18 November 2008
Nice one, Tamfang.  Can you summarise/paraphrase that and add it to the article?  Scolaire (talk) 21:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see a good way to make it concise without throwing away what makes it convincing; perhaps someone else can.  One might add (if not for WP:OR) that if the ducal title survived 1259 then it merged into the French royal title in 1340. —Tamfang (talk) 21:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Valentine Heywood 

message: I have expanded the Duchy of Normandy article adding, inter alia, everything that's in the Appanage section.  Since the title "Duke of Normandy" had different meanings in France and in England after 1259, and since this article is primarily about the English title, I propose to delete the Appanage section from this article.  Scolaire (talk) 21:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done... ;) --Cameron* 22:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent :-)  Scolaire (talk) 22:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appanage 

message: Since Elizabeth II is a woman, shouldn't she be titled as the "Duchess" of Normandy, and not the "Duke" of Normandy?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.109.152.109 (talk) 03:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Even though Elizabeth II is a women all monarchs who hold the Duchy of Normany are styled Duke (I'm not sure why but thats how it is). The Quill (talk) 18:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

text: It's equally daft either way. —Tamfang (talk) 02:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

text: The question was not whether the tradition exists, but whether it shouldn't be something slightly different. —Tamfang (talk) 05:19, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Henry VII onwards?  Try Henry II, the first to inherit the crown of England through his mother. —Tamfang (talk) 01:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

text: A correction, absolutely none of the french medieval peerages were governed by Salic law. Every single one of them passed to women at least once, multiple times in the cases of Toulouse and Brittany, with the sole exception of Normandy because Henry I's succession was a complete clusterfuck. 74.56.208.54 (talk) 07:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender Confusion 

message: It would be nice if those who are so firm in the conviction that the Queen is Duke of Normandy would dispute the counterarguments rather than ignoring them.  For example:
* cite the clause of the treaty of 1259 that allowed Henry to keep the style;
* explain how the ducal title was not merged into the (titular) crown of France after 1340;
* explain the amazing coincidence by which the ducal succession went through exactly the same irregularities as the royal succession of England; or, if the ducal title is attached to the English crown rather than descending independently, explain why this article should repeat what amounts to a list of the monarchs of England in full numbing detail when it's readily available elsewhere.
Somewhere or other I've seen the full styles of Queen Mary (Tudor) and King Philip (Habsburg); I think it's in Fox-Davies The Art of Heraldry but couldn't find it through the index.  I do remember that the list includes "erles of Tirol", so if Mary claimed dukeship of Normandy it ought to be in there; if it's not, will anyone's mind be changed? —Tamfang (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha!  Found it in Philip II of Spain: "Their joint royal style after Philip ascended the Spanish throne in 1556 was: Philip and Mary, by the Grace of God King and Queen of England, Spain, France, Jerusalem, both the Sicilies and Ireland, Defenders of the Faith, Archdukes of Austria, Dukes of Burgundy, Milan and Brabant, Counts of Habsburg, Flanders and Tirol." —Tamfang (talk) 17:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  These styles are also recited in Style of the British Sovereign; which also mentions: In 1204, England lost both Normandy and Anjou. Nevertheless, they did not renounce the associated titles until 1259. —Tamfang (talk) 05:28, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  oh come now 

message: And the French Monarch was overthrown then how could this still remain active??? Did the new French Republic recognise this agreement?  Even Squatters rights would have kicked in by now. This claim sounds to me to be as frivolous as Russia's claim on Alaska. CaribDigita (talk) 14:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not entirely clear what you mean by this agreement.  You might consider, for comparison, the principalities of Monaco and Andorra. —Tamfang (talk) 16:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: If this agreement was with the French Monarch

message: : In 1204, the King of France confiscated the Duchy of Normandy and subsumed it into the crown lands of France. The followings Kings of France ruled as Dukes of Normandy:
Wrong.  No one was ever simultaneously duke of Normandy and king of France: the king cannot be his own vassal.  Accordingly, none of the articles on the kings mention their holding such a title.  The article Philip VI of France refers to his son the future king as duke of Normandy, but John II of France does not!
A few kings of France may have been simultaneously dukes of Brittany, before Brittany (like French Navarre a bit later) was annexed to the kingdom proper; but I don't think the kings of France ever denied that Normandy was part of their kingdom. —Tamfang (talk) 20:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. What are you quoting? —Tamfang (talk) 20:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  kings of France 

message: Wasn't Marie Antoinette's father a Duke of Normandy? I think I read something about that in Kathryn Lasky's "Royal Diaries" about her, but, then again, it is historical fiction, so I could be wrong. (Read the book! It is sooo good!)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.33.132.202 (talk) 20:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: According to her article, she was "the youngest daughter of Emperor Francis I and Empress Maria Theresa of the Holy Roman Empire."  That's a long way from Normandy!  Scolaire (talk) 21:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

text: He was formerly duke of Lorraine (and gave it up in the settlement of 1735, in exchange for Tuscany).  Lorraine is (now) in northern France, so is that close enough? —Tamfang (talk) 04:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Marie Antoinette's Dad

message: The article Empress Matilda seem to say, as far as I understand, that she was reigning duchess of the Duchy of Normandy jointly with her spouse from 1144 until 1149. Is this correct? If so, then should she not have an sucessionbox which states this, and should she not also be included in the List of rulers of the Duke of Normandy? It should also be stated exactly which years she ruled Normandy in the absence of her son. --Aciram (talk) 12:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems that Geoffrey Plantagenet was Duke of Normandy by the right of conquest.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 20:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reigning Duchess of Normandy 

message: I get that it's normally English language and Euro-American bias versus other languages and cultures, but this article seems a rather silly example of English bias against the French. Philip Augustus didn't 'declare the title forfeit' out of the ether: John wasn't the sole legitimate claimant and went out of his way to (possibly personally) murder the other guy. That should at least be mentioned in the article and the list as the basis (along with John's refusal to appear before Philip to even answer to the charges) for the French seizure, if nothing else. — LlywelynII 00:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:BIAS]]: King John wasn't the sole legal claimant & that was the whole problem