Talk:Louis Bonaparte

message: On the Dutch page, Louis' nickname is given as de Lamme Koning. Can anyone translate this nickname? I can't find laame in any online dictionary. SigPig 15:01, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lamme Koning = Lame King Dedden 14:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I thought that's what it might be, but I wasn't 100% sure. SigPig 16:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He cant have been seen as smart. Even though it was not customary of him to know the Dutch langage, saying Conijn instead of Konink is more than a common mistake. Anyone can point out that he never knew where to install a Capital (or Principal) City, but I'm calling it a technical detail. The Conijn...thought he would rid himself of his French Nationality, and call himself a Dutchman. Any grown up Dutchman of that time, would either know or behave in such a manner, as if Batavia already was a (de facto) region of France. Napoleon was cheesed of with his own brother, dethroned him, and just said it that Batavia was independant no more. --82.134.28.194 (talk) 08:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Louis' nicknames

message: He was never Grand Duke of Berg, that was his son Napoleon Louis Bonaparte. Känsterle 12:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Berg

message: Can someone tell me WHERE the factual accuracy is discussed, as none of the few discussion items do state that they link to the tag. If not, I will soon remove the tage on the page. Thanks Arnoutf 15:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual accuracy

message: The portrait of him showing the least degree of beautification is found here.  This bust has been claimed to portray Napoléon I Bonaparte.  Yet the combination of wavy hair, thicker lips and a longer nose has convinced me that it is the misidentified portrait of his brother Louis who had Napoléon as his second name.  (A good comparison would be with this drawing of Napoléon.)  Louis could very well have looked just like that since all the traits can be found in people alive today.  In fact it exactly matches Ian Holm when he was young except for the chin which is very different.  On the other hand this chin can be found in a living, male line only descendant of Louis' younger brother Jérôme named Jean-Christophe Bonaparte.  No, this shared trait is not due to the bloodline between them!  Although both Jérôme and his son Napoléon Joseph had protruding chins none of them had any cleft in theirs.  Napoléon Joseph's son Victor did not even have any particularly large chin.  I have never seen any photo of Victor's son Louis  However, I can tell that Jean-Christophe's father Charles has a protruding chin but no cleft in it.  Consequentially, Jean-Christophe must have inherited the cleft in his chin from his mother Béatrice.  (This trait is due to a dominant gene.)  So it is questionable if Jean-Christophe has any more in common with the king of Holland than the Y-chromosome.  The physical resemblance between Louis an Ian should not be overestimated either.  Louis was considerably taller compared to the average of his time and may have been more heavily built.  I am not sure about which colours Louis had.  However, if you imagine him with Ian's colours you probably don't get too far from reality (although he might well have been more dark-skinned).  Yet if you would ask me the persons bearing the closest resemblance to Ian would be Louis’ older brothers Napoléon and Lucien.  All three is or where small and thin with a rather big forehead, black hair and a similarly shaped nose.  (“A rather big forehead” is my attempt to describe their shape of face.)  But while both Napoléon and Lucien had strait hair Ian's hair is naturally wavy.  Napoléon had the same eyes and Lucien the same nose as Ian.  However, Napoléon had a shorter nose then the two others and Lucien had large, brown eyes.  Both the Bonaparte brothers also had thinner lips than Ian and a protruding chin with a cleft.  This was completely unlike Ian's rounded one.  Finally, Napoléon and Lucien where probably a little more dark-skinned than Ian.  But this is nothing strange since Ian is nearly as light-skinned as anyone can be.  So we are not talking about look-alikes here.
The original bust of Louis is too old to have any copyright.  If there originally was any it has long expired.  However, there could be copyright on the photo of the bust just like there is copyright on this photo of a statue portraying his younger brother Jérôme.  If anyone knows he or she should contact me.  My e-mail address can be found in the last page of this PDF.
2010-12-29  Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
The PDF I previously referred to have been removed from my website.  My e-mail address can now be found here.
2014-01-12 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.247.167.113 (talk) 18:29, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portrait 

message: I don’t think Louis was homosexual.  If he had been it he had never had sex with any other woman than his wife Hortense.  (This would have worked is he simultaneously imagined himself doing it with a man.)  All his sex partners outside marriage would have been men.  This would have efficiently prevented him from having any illegitimate child.  However, Louis really seems to have had an illegitimate son.  He was named Francesco di Castelvecchio.  Anyone who can verify this?
Is there any concrete indication of Louis having any homosexual emotions?  Did any man claim to have had sex with him at a time we know they had the chance to be alone with each other?  Did he treat any other man as if he was his lover?  Please note that “homosexual” does not mean “unmanly”.  (Such ideas have varied considerably between times and places anyway.)  A person thinking like that would probably mistake me for a lesbian when I am in fact completely heterosexual.
2012-08-01  Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
:The line was supported by a reference to a book (see http://www.amazon.co.uk/Napoleon-III-Profiles-Power-Mcmillan/dp/0582494834/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1343845917&sr=1-1) on his son (Napoleon III) which seems a reliable source WP:RS. I am not sure the book states that claim, but would need to check to figure it out for sure. 
:Re your arguments, in the early 19th century homosexuality was no longer punishable, but that does not mean it was accepted in the ruling classes. Also, perhaps Louis was having a mistress to fool himself, or others. In any case there are many reasons. We have to go with the sources.   Arnoutf (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was he hetero- or bisexual?