Jump to content

Talk:Queen Mathilde of Belgium

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

The entry contains the following (contradictory) information:

"...Though her grandfather and her uncle were barons, she and her father were members of the untitled nobility...

Mathilde's father is Count (formerly Jonkheer) Patrick d'Udekem d'Acoz..."

Now he EITHER is an untitled member of the aristocracy or gentry (can't be nobility) OR he is a count.

WHAT is it?

Verity Truth (talk) 20:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, like in the Netherlands, there is an untitled nobility in Belgium. Members of the nobility who don't have a title are entitled to use the style "Jonkheer" (in Dutch) or Ecuyer (in French). Princess Mathilde's father was a member of the untitled nobility as her grandfather's title of baron had passed to her uncle. By Royal Order of 8 November 1999, baron Henri d'Udekem d'Acoz, Raoul d'Udekem d'Acoz and Patrick d'Udekem d'Acoz were granted the title of count for themselves and their descendants. This Royal Order entered into force on the date of the wedding of Prince Philippe and Princess Mathilde.--Ganchelkas (talk) 15:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


...therefore if Prince Philippe assumes the throne, Princess Mathilde will become the only European Queen Consort with noble ancestry.

This sentence doesn't seem right. What was the criteria used to say that she will become the ONLY consort with noble ancestry? Is it of a ruling house? Because Queen Sofia of Spain was born a princess, so in this case we assume that will only be if Prince Philippe ascends after the King or Queen of Spain are dead? If it is of a ruling house, have you considered principalities? Sophie, Hereditary Princess of Liechtenstein was born a duchess and became a princess before her marriage, and there are also a few other cases of marriages between ruling and non ruling houses that also debunk that and a few others where the queen's or crown princess' nobility comes from an illegitimate line. The link that supposedly shows her nobility is of her mother, a Polish princess, therefore non ruling. I don't know if it refers to nobility in the country of the throne her husband is to inherit, then her father's genealogy is needed... there are a few possibilities here, can someone clarify that? ˜˜˜˜—Preceding unsigned comment added by Notconnectedtome (talkcontribs) 03:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe with the sentence was meant: ...therefore if Prince Philippe assumes the throne, Princess Mathilde will become the only European Queen Consort of nobility. And with nobility I only mean "legally" recognized, since the nobility in Germany and Greece is abolished. Demophon (talk) 16:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So is in Poland, where her nobility comes from, the monarchy abolished. Argument still flawed. (Notconnectedtome (talk) 13:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]
The Duchess of Brabant's father was a Belgian nobleman. Surtsicna (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


(because Camilla Parker Bowles only belongs to the gentry.

I concur that the comparative nobility statement seems needlessly contentious in an article that is otherwise very informative. Whatever one may think about the nobiliary status of the English gentry, the Duchess of Cornwall is a cadet of Shand of Craig, an armigerous Scottish family; her father bears arms that are registered with the Lord Lyon; all Scottish armigers are constituted members of the noblesse of Scotland. Either the Duchess is a Scottish noblewoman by birth, or we're judging by English standards, by which all foreign nobles (including the Duchess) have the rank of esquire, and all of the ladies mentioned in this passage consequently rank as members of the gentry in England. Why get into it? Liushazhai (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, King Albert II raised Mathilde's family from the rank of esquire to count. Keep in mind also that Mathilde's uncle was already a baron in his own right. Her father was only a esquire (jonkheer) because, in his family in particular, the baronial title descended only by primogeniture, which is actually somewhat rare in the nobility of Belgium and the Netherlands. In any case, untitled nobility is legally recognized in Belgium, unlike in the UK, and there's no legal doubt that Mathilde is of noble birth (hence why she was legally entitled to use the jonkvrouw predicate from birth). As for Camilla, what title or honorific predicate did she have before marrying Prince Charles ? 161.24.19.112 (talk) 14:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was moved. Editors favoring a move have both a numerical majority and the support of a specific project naming guideline. While an RfC has been opened on WP:CONSORTS, the guideline as written supports this move. If the guideline is deprecated, it may be appropriate to reverse the move. --BDD (talk) 16:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mathilde of BelgiumQueen Mathilde of Belgium – Article should be moved to reflect her new status as consort, as per WP:CONSORTS, she should have Queen in front of her article name. Morhange (talk) 10:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.


Title

[edit]

Shouldn't the title of the article be "Queen Mathilde of the Belgians" ? There is no such title as "Queen of Belgium" or, for that matter, "King of Belgium". 161.24.19.112 (talk) 14:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mathilde is not "Queen of the Belgians". That title is reserved to reigning queens. Her legal titles in Belgium are "Queen", "Princess of Belgium", and "Countess d'Udekem d'Acoz".2804:14C:165:8EC3:C0FA:D446:67A:7BB (talk) 11:05, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Queen Mathilde of Belgium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Queen Mathilde of Belgium. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 21:08, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]