Talk:Henry (VII) of Germany

Untitled

I've made a few changes while adding links, but the only one of particular note is changing "rectorship" to "regency". "Rector" is (AIUI) Latin for "Regent" and Runciman says that Charles of Anjou in 1257 "acquired from Raymond of Les Baux, Count of Orange, the rights as regent of the Kingdom of Arles", Kingdom of Arles=Kingdom of Burgundy. In this case it seems to have been a sort of hereditary bailli-ship; but "regent" is the correct title, as best I can tell. User:Choess 02:44, 30 June 2005

All right, I guess your right about the regency thing. However I linked "kingdom of Burgundy" not to "kings of Burgundy", since the list stops with Conrad II taking over, but rather to County of Burgundy, which deals with the history in that period. The thing with Franche-Comte is, that the regency of the kingdom brought with it the rule in a part of the kingdom my atlas calls "Rectorate of Burgundy", which later turns into the Franche-Comte. Str1977 30 June 2005 22:56 (UTC)

Sounds good for now. Someone (me, I suppose) should really do some research on this and write a better article on the Kingdom of Burgundy and what regions were still technically part of it after its absorption by the Holy Roman Empire. Choess July 1, 2005 00:30 (UTC)

Franche-Comté had its own counts already in time of Henry (VII) - they were then called as palatine counts of Burgundy, therefore I greatly doubt that "rectorat of Burgundy" actually covered that dominion. And, it is absolutely wrong to link Henry (VII) to county of Burgundy, as he certsinly was not such count, and as there was another, recognized count at that time. 217.140.193.123 1 July 2005 09:56 (UTC)

Dear 217..., if you know more about this, than please post improvements.

I base my connection to FC on a map in my "historical atlas", edited by Walter Leisering, published 1997 by Cornelsen, page 47. Here we have a map of "central and western europe from the 11th to the 1th century". We have the kingdom of arelat and inside of this a territory labeled "Rekt. Burgund" - in exactly the same place where later Franche-Comte appears.

Now, if I'm wrong, please provide a better explanation.

Nobody said he was "Count of Burgundy"

I put the link to "County of Burgundy", since there is not entry for "Kingdom of Burgundy", the entry "Kings of Burgundy" stops with Conrad II acceding to the Burgundian crown, while the "County of Burgundy" is part of the Kingdom at that time and the entry covers events from the time in question. Str1977 1 July 2005 11:19 (UTC)

Dear 217... and all, I retract. You are right and my atlas was wrong or misleading. The rector (I return to that term because it can be understood in English and is a rather dubious term at that time as well) was the representative of the king in the kingdom of Burgundy. It became a heritage of the Zähringer family and in regard of a territory was based not in the Franche-Comte but east of the Jura mountains (today's Switzerland). I have added a chapter about the rectorate to king of Burgundy and linked to this. Granted, it is now more of a Kingdom of Burgundy entry, but so be it. Str1977 1 July 2005 23:39 (UTC)

Title

Does the title of this article fit with WP naming style? -Acjelen 23:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

External link

I've added an external link to an interesting article about Henry's remains. He was seriously ill with leprosy by the time of his death. Silverwhistle 20:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

His children

This genealogical table (http://www.bartleby.com/67/german03.html) shows him with two sons. What happened to them? His wife's article says she died childless, and Conradin is said to be the last legitimate Hohenstaufen. So, is the genealogical table wrong? SamEV 11:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Henry II of Sicily

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved per discussion below. Whether or not this is the ideal title for this article, there seems to be agreement that it's an improvement over the old title. GTBacchus^(talk) 21:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

---

Henry (VII) of Germany → Henry II of Sicily — Since the present title is unneccessarily confusing the reader by calling him Henry VII (and yet stating that he is not counted as Henry VII), I'd like to know how the community feels about moving the article to Henry II of Sicily. He was King of Sicily as well as King of Germany so the alternative title is correct. I cannot claim that he is known by one name or another; there are not many references to "Henry II of Sicily" but it is not always easy to tell whether a text refers to Henry "the Seventh" or Henry the Seventh. I proposed this move simply to make the matter a bit more simple. I do not advocate the proposed title or the present title. What do you think? Surtsicna (talk) 19:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Looking at this, this looks like an absolute quagmire. Putting the VII in brackets looks like the least satisfactory option. What do other reference works call him? PatGallacher (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Tentative support on the grounds that he is listed among kings of Sicily but not Holy Roman Emperors, but this could do with further investigation. PatGallacher (talk) 09:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Support Henry II of Sicily cause it's easier to recognize. --Sarah desan (talk) 00:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

---

Henry II of Sicily → Henry (VII) of Germany — The previous move request was invalid, since the name "Henry II of Sicily" is a Wikipedian neologism that this person is never actually called. We have no right to invent this stuff. At least the name I propose, the original name of this article, is found in more than one reliable source. In fact, I cited one source in the article, but that citation and that information has now been removed twice. Srnec (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages does not have a separate article on him; in the article on his father he is referred to as "Henry (VII)". His article in the German-language Lexikon des Mittelalters is under "Heinrich (VII)". Noel S McFerran (talk) 03:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
• Support per nom and Noel S McFerran. Dohn joe (talk) 19:34, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
• Support sources clearly refer to him more often as number seven: [1], [2], , [3], [4]. ^walk victor falk ^talk 18:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

It is not good practice to reverse a properly taken move discussion in this way. When I looked at this earlier I found that reference works just tend to call him "Henry". However I will look at this again. I did not mean to delete an appropriate citation, this probably got mixed up with reverting some other changes, feel free to re-instate. PatGallacher (talk) 22:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The move was not properly closed and the title is, I believe, unacceptable: the equivalent of moving Louis XIII of France to Louis II of Navarre when nobody was looking. The nominator gave no evidence that the title he was proposing is used at all, although he admits "there are not many references". Well, are there any? None that I can find trying many different methods. I can even find "Enrico (VII)" in a source that you'd expect might favour naming him after his Sicilian throne (here). The only support !vote for the move was justified "cause it's easier to recognize", which is absurd given that it is never found outside of Wikipedia! Nobody could recognise it! Your own support for the last move was "tentative" and you said it "could do with further investigation". That's right, and the closing admin didn't take that into account. He was clearly unsure it was the ideal title, he just thought there was consensus for change. Sure, but not for this change considering the lack of actual argument necessary to establish it. Besides the source now in the article, the Britannica uses "Henry (VII)" and there are three other sources for it in the first ten hits at GoogleBooks per this search. It is hard to find hits for this Henry unless you include the numeral "VII"! Srnec (talk) 03:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Henry (VII) of Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060513030147/http://www.paleopatologia.it/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=45 to http://www.paleopatologia.it/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=45

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)