Talk:Pierre de Montreuil

(Redirected from Talk:Peter of Montereau)
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Jenks24 in topic Requested move 2 October 2015

Requested move 2 October 2015

edit
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus is that the proposed title is the most common name in English-language reliable sources. Jenks24 (talk) 09:03, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply



Peter of MontereauPierre de Montreuil – Peter of Montereau is a name from the older literature which has been rejected by modern scholars. Robert.Allen (talk) 09:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 07:10, 10 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Oh, sorry. I based this mainly on Anne Prache's article in the The Dictionary of Art, who explains the error. For the evidence, please read the first paragraph and the footnote at it's end. Ayers (2004) uses Pierre de Montreuil. Sturgis used the name Montreuil as early as 1901. Viollet-Le-Duc refers to him as Pierre de Montereau in 1875 (see [1]). I do not have Gimpel's book, but I do know that none of the other sources cited in this article use Montereau. When this article was created, it was probably based on the article in the French Wikipedia at that time, which did not cite any sources. The French Wikipedia article seems to have been renamed on 3 January 2011 and cites Marcel Aubert, Bulletin de la société nationale des Antiquaires de France, p. 115-119 (without a date, but Prache gives the date for his article as 1943–4). --Robert.Allen (talk) 20:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
Pierre de Montreuil is used in these English-language sources cited in the article: Sturgis (1901), Ayers (2004), Carruthers (2010), and Prache (1996) (not freely available online, but the title of her article is "Pierre de Montreuil"), so even in English-language sources, the name has not been typically translated. --Robert.Allen (talk) 06:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.