Talk:List of monarchs of Hesse

Should rulers' names be given in their English or in their German form?

Dear John, dear Kmorozov, I have seen that you have edited Rulers of Hesse in the past, so I am asking you about your opinions:

• Should rulers' names be given in their English or in their German form?
• What should be done about articles that have been created with the non-preferred spelling/form in their title?

Thanks for your consideration. Str1977 19:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

No clear rule has ever been established on English vs. German names. The basic rule is to use the "most commonly used form in English", but sometimes this can be unclear, and it is especially so in contexts like this. I'd say to just use your best judgment and make it uniform. john k 19:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, John, for the quick reply. But I cannot use my best judgement as I'm no native speaker and of course know all these names in German. Sometimes it doesn't make much of a difference as with Philip(p), and sometimes I am clearly on the German side (Ludwig) but what about Friedrich or Wilhelm? Let alone Moritz? The only thing I certainly will change is the strange spelling "Cassel". Str1977 19:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...I would say that the usage on this is basically inconclusive. Probably the anglicized version is somewhat favored, but in decline. That is, more recent books are more likely to use the German versions of the name. Which means I guess I'd vote slightly for the anglicized forms, but it doesn't really matter - it's more important to just be consistent. john k 19:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again, John. I guess I will go with the english versions then, even that means spelling it Louis. But I am all for consistency (not only re Hesse but re all rulers - it sounds strange if you have a Friedrich who is the son-in-law of a Frederick). However, I will wait and see what the second editor I asked will have to say. Str1977 19:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I think, should be in English, e.g. Ludwig -> Louis etc and existing German-styled articles should be redirected to its English forms. But i cannot find something appropriate in the MOS. Kmorozov 06:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

It would be in Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Basically, the rule is that we "use the most commonly used form in English." But that doesn't mean we necessarily anglicize - sometimes the native form is more commonly used in English than an anglicized form. In this case, I would say that the anglicized form is somewhat more common (although "Ernest Louis" seems awkward to me for the last Grand Duke), but not terribly so. As I told str, I would not really care either way, but would probably going very slightly towards anglicization. john k 06:23, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

All right, then I will make some changes towards the English, leaving out Ernst Ludwig for the moment. Str1977 14:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

All right, guys, I have done that much. I have adhered to the following rule: all landgraves I have title "Name Number of Hesse", as the numbering is not restricted to one line but are unambiguous across all lines (I am only wondering where William III is). The Grand-Dukes I have titled "Name Number of Hesse-Darmstadt". Louis X/I I have titled as Louis I of Hesse-Darmstadt, as that is his higher title. (I haven't done anything to Ernst Ludwig as long as his name is in the open). The same rule would apply to the Electors when articles on them are created, starting with "William I of Hesse-Kassel".

The articles on the Grand Dukes are in a terribly uneven state: stubs of Louis II and III and a novel for Louis IV. I haven't delved much into the non-ruling members of the family, though there is much room for improvement, especially Alexander of Hesse-Darmstadt.

Str1977 16:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I had to go back on my initial decision on titling the Grand Dukes and Electors. Now, they are titled "Name Number Grand Duke of Hesse" and "Name Number Elector of Hesse". Ernst Ludwig still remains unchanged for now. He was the reason for this last change, as there is also a Landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt called Ernst Ludwig - having a Ernst Ludwig of Hesse (the Landgrave) and a Ernst Ludwig of Hesse-Darmstadt (the Grand Duke) would have been too confusing.

Another problem to my solution are the Landgraves of Hesse-Homburg as they do bear names identical to some other Landgraves (as I said, this doesn't happen between the four lines created in 1567). But my suggestion is to keep the status quo and if articles are created on the Homburg line to title them "Name Number of Hesse-Homburg" (while the four great lines only have "of Hesse").

There is some confusion to Upper Hesse from 1458 to 1500. Either Henry III resigned in favour of Louis III or the latter was his father's co-regent for a while (I haven't been able to find any literature on this). In any case, he is numbered as Louis III - the numbering formerly used in the English Wikipedia was wrong - the German Wiki has it right (checked as per Lexikon des Mittelalters).

Comments? Str1977 19:53, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey Str - I thought we were just discussing the language form of the given name here, not the rest of the title. Personally, I'd prefer that we name articles on landgraves "Name Number, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel" or "Name Number, Landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt," and that we keep the Electors and Grand Dukes as they are (although it might be better to have Louis I, Grand Duke of Hesse and by Rhine rather than just Louis I, Grand Duke of Hesse). This is what Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) currently indicates (I think - it did when last I checked) is the way that such articles should be titles, and it nicely prevents any confusion. john k 19:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

John, we sure can change the landgraves into including their respective residence, be it Kassel, Darmstadt, Rheinfels or Marburg. I'd prefer "Louis I Grand Duke of Hesse", as this is much more common. You won't find Ludwig I, King of Bavaria, Duke of Franconia and Swabia, Count Palatine by Rhine, but you will find Ludwig I of Bavaria. We can always include the full title in the headline of the article itself. Str1977 20:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The only reason to have "and by Rhine" in the title is for junior members of the family, as in the 19th century this title distinguished Darmstadt princes from Kassel ones - i.e. a junior member of the Kassel family would be "Prince Friedrich of Hesse," but a junior member of the Darmstadt line would be "Prince Alexander of Hesse and by Rhine". john k 20:53, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

In that case I'd prefer to add Kassel or Darmstadt. Really, no one really uses the "by Rhine" addition. Str1977 21:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

It is used for 19th century figures, sometimes. But we'd probably be okay just sticking with "Prince N of Hesse". As to the Ernst Ludwig's, you'd have Ernest Louis, Landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt and Ernest Louis, Grand Duke of Hesse... john k 21:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

After much ado I have completed this task. All Landgraves are now titled "Name Number, Landgrave of Hesse" or "Name Number, Landgrave of Hesse-Residence". Electors and Grand Dukes as above. I finally settled for the English version of "Ernst Ludwig", just for consistency.

One man alone remains: Louis the Junker (formerly falsely called Louis I) - He wasn't actually Landgrave (or was he, I have to dig again) and is not numbered (strangely his brother Hermann I is numbered). So "Louis the Junker, Langrave of Hesse" might be false, while "Louis the Junker of Hesse" is strange and misleading. I will consider this further when I have finished digging. It isn't urgent anyway as it is a red link. Good night, Str1977 01:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Layout

I think, it would be cool to make layout as here List of rulers of Bavaria#Wittelsbach_Dynasty Kmorozov 10:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Line of Hesse-Darmstaft became extinct

I was very surprised to see this line in the article, while correct to state that the direct line died out, stating the whole family ceased to exist is incorrect, there are significant numbers of members this family line still alive today in the USA, South Africa and Australia. I am not that familar with the terms of reference of an article, i.e. when a family line is said to cease to exist, but think that it requires at a minimum rewording.

What are you talking about? There are many descendants of the Landgraves of Hesse-Darmstadt who are live, but the only agnatic descendants that I'm aware of are the Mountbattens, who are not dynasts. And none of them live in the USA, South Africa, or Australia. What are you referring to? john k (talk) 03:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Inclusion of non-sovereign lines

I kind of feel as though the article is a bit muddled by the inclusion of so many non-sovereign lines like Hesse-Rotenburg and Hesse-Philippsthal. Any thought to removing the non-sovereign cadet lines to their own article, and leave only those lines who had imperial immediacy or ruled over sovereign states after the end of the Holy Roman Empire? john k (talk) 03:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Extinction/succession/adoption

1. Louis of Hesse and by Rhine dies
2. Philipp of Hesse-Kassel, already head of the Electoral House of Hesse, succeeds Louis to "the total headship"[1] of Hesse, even though Louis had "nominally adopted"[2] Philipp's son, Moritz
3. Moritz is head of the House of Hesse since Philipp died in 1980[3]

Why are Philipp and Moritz (and Moritz's son. Donatus) omitted from the article? 71.234.215.133 (talk) 15:28, 15 July 2011 (UTC)