Talk:Ernst August V, Prince of Hanover

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Germany Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This section:

Contents

[edit] Ernst August, King of England?

As the senior male descendant of Ernest Augustus I of Hanover (1771 - 1851) (who was the younger brother of Queen Victoria's father, the Duke of Kent), Ernest Augustus would now be king of England, if Queen Victoria had been unable to succeed. For example, if females had been excluded from the succession (which prevented her from succeeding to the throne of Hanover), or if, as suggested in a recent book, Victoria had been illegitimate.

Is rather odd; I don't quite get the point.

  • [1] There is no "King of England" at present. There is a "Queen of the United Kingdom".
  • [2] Queen Victoria quite clearly was "able to succeed"
  • [3] If Queen Victoria had had a different biological father that in and of itself would not have affected her legitimacy. As a child born in wedlock, she is legitimate and able to succeed.
  • [4] females are not excluded from succeession, never have been, and it has never been suggested that they should
  • [5] if Queen Victoria had not succeeded, that fact alone would change history, and there's no reason to believe that the marriages that have occurred since would have occurred
  • [6] if nonetheless they had occurred, Ernst August would be (and is) forever excluded from the throne because he married a "Papist".
I'll edit this down to him being the head of the house of Hanover. - Nunh-huh 20:27, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

==

It was alleged that EA of Hanover would be rightful heir "according to Burke's Peerage" if Victoria were a bastard. I don't believe Burke's says any such thing: in fact, since EA of Hanover holds no peerage titles, I don't believe he appears in Burke's; he certainly isn't in the index of the 106th (next-to-latest) edition. - Nunh-huh 21:08, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)


EA of Hanover does not hold peerage but he could apply for Dukedom of Cumberland to return to his family under the title deprivation act. He family was stripped of the dukedom of Cumberland due their german connections and loyalties in 1917

The actual reason for deprivation of Ernest Augustus II of Hanover's titles was "bearing arms against Great Britain", not his connections or loyalties. - Nunh-huh 23:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prince of Great Britain and Ireland

This should read Northern Ireland. Ireland is a republic since 1948 and this German thug has no right to style himself "Prince of Ireland" - (apparently by "RoyalPirate"?)

No, the title to which he makes pretense is "Prince of Great Britain and Ireland", and it traces back to long before Ireland was a republic. - Nunh-huh 01:46, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Germany (Hanover) is a republic too, in case you hadn't noticed. :-) -- Curps 03:30, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Prince of Great Britain and Ireland

I had noticed but it seems Ernst August has not.

One can be fairly certain that Ernst August is very well aware that he lives in a democratic Germany. However, if we're going to follow this dubious line of thought, re title bashing, we're going to have to excise any and all aristocratic distinctions in any and all Wiki entries about people who are former royals, aristocrats, et cetera, from countries that no longer exist or no longer officially recognize titles, even if those people are popularly and universally known by titles technically defunct. Which seems like a lot of work just to make a point. I might also point out that in democracies, former presidents, ambassadors, senators, et cetera, are commonly referred to and addressed by their former titles out of common courtesy. Mowens35 12:48, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, no need for title bashing, but I would say there is no need for excessive use of titles either. Who exactly calls him "His Royal Highness The Prince of Hanover, Duke of Brunswick and Lüneburg, Royal Prince of Great Britain and Ireland" except for himself and a very small number of fans of the House of Hanover? This is his legal title neither in the UK nor in Germany, and he is not duke of anything that actually exists. In Germany, where he is frequently mentioned in the tabloids, he is known just as "Prinz von Hannover" (Prince of Hanover), because that is his legal surname. Certainly nobody calls him Royal Highness or Duke. These are not former titles of his, by the way -- the Kingdom of Hanover ceased to exist in 1866, more than 80 years before Ernst August was born. --Chl 04:29, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Actually, his wife's family, the royal family of Monaco, calls him that and recognizes her as HRH The Princess of Hanover, Duchess of et cetera, et cetera. When he's in Britain, he's recognized similarly, out of courtesy for what no longer legally exists. These are not necessary "fans" of the House of Hanover. He is called these out of courtesy and he remains recognized as such by various ruling houses. It's not my job (nor Wiki's) to spend an inordinate amount of time parsing who is and who isn't any longer a title holder, particularly if such titles are regularly used, especially out of courtesy. And though the Kingdom of Hanover no longer exists, nobody's complaining if he uses titles he would be entitled to if it still existed. See our entries re Leka of Albania, Elizabeth of Yugoslavia, et cetera. Wiki allows various deposed royals to remain listed by their former titles or the former titles of their families without an enormous amount of discussion or angst. Like I said, if we're going to do away with any and all royal titles, particularly those no longer extant, somebody's got a big job ahead of him/her. And frankly, it's going to make a researcher's work much harder, not to say impossible, if they want to use Wiki to find out about somebody the general public regards as Princess of this or that, but we list her as Jane von Doppelganger. Mowens35 20:37, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The German tabloids are more likely to call him "der Prügelprinz" or "der Pinkelprinz" than "Prinz von Hannover". --Angr/탉 09:47, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I am inclined to agree. It seems to be standard practise by royal court to accord 'former royals' and their descendants by the titles and styles they would have held if the family were still reigning. Yugoslavia no longer exists but the members of former royal house are still referred to as prince and princesses of Yugoslavia with the style of royal highness as the former houses of Greek, Italy, Iran etc the list endless. That said, Wiki's editors are just following what seems to royal court practise. Its also worth noting that on the marriage of Prince Ernest to Princess Caroline the Queen was required to consent as Ernest was subject to royal marriages act. When she gave her consent she refer to Ernest as His Royal Highness Prince Ernest of Hannover. We could debate the legal status of Ernest von Hannover for years. I think it very clear the legally he is no longer a prince - that is not dispute. But it seems to be generally accepted practise former royals to style themselves by the legally dysfunct titles.

[edit] Template

someone added a monarch template to this page...he is not a reigning monarch, he has no heir aparent and his titles are not legally recognized. I deleted it for these reasons and it was overwhelmingly large. Some people around wikipedia seem to be treating the former German Royals as if they still rule, i dont have a problem with using thier titles, but when people start to make succession boxes for thrones that have ceased to exist since world war one, i do have a problem. Mac Domhnaill 18:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

It isn't a monarch template. It is a pretender template. That it is not a monarch template is shown in four ways.

  • It explicitly states the guy is a pretender to a throne, not a monarch.
  • It uses personal name, not title or claimed regnal name, at the top.
  • It is deliberately placed differently (not at the top but down a paragraph) to avoid any equation with a monarch or a pope box.
  • It deliverately uses a different colour scheme from all royal boxes, using green, a colour not associated with monarchy, rather than purple, red, yellow, blue etc, all colours associated with monarchy. That shade of green was deliberately picked to be as far away as possible from monarchical colours.

The box was created to pull together some important facts on pages about people who are pretenders to thrones, namely the personal name of the person, what regnal name their supporters claim they have (and the world "claim") is explicitly used in the box, when they were born, when the monarchy was abolished, who was the last monarch, their relationship back to that person and the royal house they head. Reading pages on pretenders it became obvious that information was scattered, in some places had to follow, POV captions were being slipped in under pictures, etc. This way, the picture is captionless, the key facts are pulled together, their status as a pretender, not a monarch is explicitly stated (so making POV edits calling people "king" or "queen" more difficult if there is a whopping big box saying pretender on the page) and all the pages that are already themed by a category have a themed neutral graphic. Graphics on themes, whether people, places, titles, claims to titles or whatever are standard all over Wikipedia. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 23:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] article title

Why does the title of this article humor his princely pretensions? If he is not actually a prince of anything, shouldn't the actual title of the article just be Ernest Augustus Hanover. youngamerican (talk) 12:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

His title is used to refer to him in a number of princely and royal courts. He simply is not known as Ernest Augustus Hanover. Charles 15:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Which ones? It seems that the only one where it holds any legitimacy is Monaco. youngamerican (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
The United Kingdom, namely. At the funeral of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, Ernest and Caroline are listed among members of foreign royal families as Prince and Princess Ernst August of Hanover. The same courtesy is extended to The Duke of Aosta, King Michael and Queen Anne of Romania, and King Constantine and Queen Anne-Marie of the Hellenes. Charles 15:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I still find the whole concept of a heriditary monarchy a bit silly, but it appears my country is headed towards heriditary oligarchy, so there you go. youngamerican (talk) 16:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate 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 debate was no consensus. 08:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Ernest Augustus V, Prince of Hanover → Ernst August, Prince of Hanover – {Ernst August is used overwhelmingly for him in English and, as a pretender, no ordinal number should be used in the article's name} Lethiere 06:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

  • Support. See rationale below at Discussion. Lethiere 06:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose for the moment, because how would we differentiate between all the other "Ernst August of Hannover"'s if there four before this current one? Gryffindor 12:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose There is no valid reason in my eyes to be changing things at this time, as I am unsure that either name is a good choice. Charles 15:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support a change to Ernest August of Hanover (1954-) or Ernest Augustus of Hanover (1954-). See comments below. youngamerican (talk) 23:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • suggest alternative He has no right to use an ordinal as he never reigned, but we do need a disambigulation reference. Why not [[Ernest Augustus (V), Prince of Hanover]]. Putting it in brackets avoids any impression that he is a reigning monarch, but allows us to distinguish between him and others of that name. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 23:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support unless there is another Ernest Augustus, Prince of Hanover. Not King, not Duke, not Elector, but Prince. And we should of course use English and spell him Ernest Augustus, like his ancestors in Hanover. Septentrionalis 02:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose, according to this article, his father was also a prince of Hanover by that name. Why isn't Ernst August, Prince of Hanover a disambiguation page? Eugene van der Pijll 16:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Currently, after the reader is redirected and disambiguated, s/he still ends up on a page whose name uses an ordinal for a pretender and a translated name that is less used in English than his actual name. Any needed re-directs or further disambiguation can be done once the page's name is determined.Lethiere 06:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Not sure if it's the correct name yet, but better than the current one. Chl 17:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Discard the proposal. You can read this as opposing. The proposed name is not good. The existing name is not good. The problem will be that when this vote is closed, its winners (whichever party it is) will say that the name has been decided. Then it would be much more difficult to get this moved to better place. The naming needs better discussion and expertised attempts to find a good name, and that has not yet occurred. Discard the whole poll, please. Shilkanni 18:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Is there an alternative process you wish to initiate? Please tell us the details of how it would work. Otherwise this is the usual WP process for changes of this type (aside from the fact that most page names are changed unilaterally and only get feedback afterwards. Pages are not frozen while discussion and "expertised attempts" are in progress). If there is specific information or expertise that should be invoked here, this is the appropriate time and place to bring it up, and it's welcome. Otherwise the applicable WP criteria seem clear to me: "Most general rule overall: use the most common form of the name used in English if none of the rules below cover a specific problem", and the relevant "rule below" is #6: "Do not apply an ordinal in an article title to a pretender, i.e., someone who has not reigned." Lethiere 20:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Lethiere, you realize, I hope, that the proposal to move to Ernst August, Prince of Hanover is going to get a decision "not moved". Would you like that afterwards, certain people will plead that the vote decided that the article will remain at "including ordinal V" ?? That, for example, any new propoal to move should get 50% more votes than the number of those who opposed this move request now?? (I have seen such happening). Move request is a thing that requires some maturity. I just hope that enthusiasts learn some maturity and even to prepare carefully and with expertise before move proposals, though having seen some people's behavior, it might just be too much to hope. Shilkanni 20:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Support, although include the ordinal (V). Anything is better then the current location. Why was it moved? Mac Domhnaill 21:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Although a celebrity through his marriage and antics, not only is his name rarely translated into English (most exceptions appear to be English-language genealogies. Yet most of them do not translate his name, even when they translate those of his German ancestors), but in formal and legal English-language contexts it is not translated: London Gazette, 12 June 1981, it was recorded in Privy Council by Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom that, "Her Majesty was also pleased, under the said Act, to declare Her Consent to a Contract of Matrimony between His Royal Highness Prince Ernst August Albert of Hanover and Chantal Hochuli..."; it's also been noted on this talk page by Charles that "At the funeral of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, Ernest and Caroline are listed among members of foreign royal families as Prince and Princess Ernst August of Hanover"; and on 11 January 1999, the afore-mentioned sovereign again issued an Order-in-Council, "My Lords, I do hereby declare My Consent to a Contract of Matrimony between His Royal Highness Prince Ernst August Albert of Hanover, Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg and Her Serene Highness Princess Caroline Louise Marguerite of Monaco...". Interestingly, the 1981 and 1999 declarations indicate that the preferred title of pretence of Hanover's claimants is Prince or Duke "of Brunswick-Luneburg", although neither of those is prevalent in English sources. Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Monarchical titles, rule #6 states "Do not apply an ordinal in an article title to a pretender, i.e. someone who has not reigned." Since some of his non-reigning "Ernst August" ancestors have used the ordinal with their names, that should be mentioned in the article. But the current scion can only be considered "Ernst August V" as pretender to the Hanoverian kingdom, since he would be the fifth king of that name upon restoration, but not the fifth Duke of either sovereign Brunswick or of Cumberland and Teviotdale. So it is impossible to escape the fact that use of the ordinal applies to his monarchical claim, and is therefore forbidden POV in WP.Lethiere 06:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I have no opinion on whether August or Agustus is correct, but I do support dropping the V from his name, as he has never reigned. The current title would be fine as a redirect, but it should not be the title. Maybe we can all write him and ask him to petition to have his ancestor's British title restored to make life easier for a few Wikipedians :). youngamerican (talk) 23:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Since we are using simple "X of Y" for monarchs, and titles for lesser ranks, he should probably not be "Ernest Augustus of Hanover"; but even that would be disambiguated from the first Duke, Ernest Augustus I of Hanover. Septentrionalis 03:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
There should be no ordinal, since he's no ruler. The given name of historical rulers is usually translated, the given name of present-day rulers sometimes. Since he's neither a ruler nor historical, there is no reason to translate his given name, except for consistency with his ancestors of the same name, but this seems like a minor concern. So Ernst August, Prince of Hanover, is a clear improvement over Ernest Augustus V, Prince of Hanover. Another question would be if "Prince of Hanover" as a title is correct. There is really no reason for us to use courtesy titles. Although I guess one could call it the proper English translation of his name as a citizen of Monaco... Disambiguation should not be an issue -- he is clearly better known than his father, so his father would be the one who possibly needs an addition in parentheses. His father, by the way, does deserve the title, since he was born before Germany got rid of titles. Chl 17:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
We use them for the French pretenders: Duke of Anjou and Duke of France IIRC. Articles titles really sghould give some hint why btheir subject is notable. Septentrionalis 23:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
I would sort of support this move, although I would include an ordinal (Ernst August V, Prince of Hanover) as although he has not reiged he is not the first Ernst August to be Prince of Hanover, and his name is technically Ernst August Prinz von Hanover V. Mac Domhnaill 21:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh my, the movement history of this article shows clearly why Cooldoug should not be allowed to make any moves. Shilkanni 22:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

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

We need to come up with a NPOV way of disambiguating all the Ernst Augusts... —Nightstallion (?) 08:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Ernest Aug. and constibute to the discussion there. Shilkanni 10:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Just so no one reading is confused, in the name "Ernst August V", the "V" is not a regnal ordinal, but rather an indication that he's the fifth family member to be named Ernst August. It's like "Sr." or "Jr.", not like "Henry VIII". - Nunh-huh 19:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
If that is what we are dong, it should be Ernst August (V), Prince of Hanover. john k 16:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Future title...

If he survives to be the first husband of a head of state of Monaco, what would his title be? youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 13:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Presumably it would remain HRH The Prince of Hanover. Charles 19:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)