Talk:Fils de France

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

France High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

the title fils de france is actually sons of France. I'll make the correction in the article. 71.148.26.252 22:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fils is French for both "son" and "sons". Thus "fils de France" is both plural and singular. French for "Children of France" is "enfants de France", and the singular is "enfant de France". Correction has been made. FactStraight (talk) 05:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the endpapers of Lucy Norton's Historical Memoirs of the Duc de Saint-Simon, Volume III, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1972, there is a facsimile of one of the handwritten pages of Louis de Rouvroy, duc de Saint-Simon's memoirs. It specifically refers to Philippe II, Duke of Orléans as, "S.A.R. Mg'r le Duc d'Orléans" with the title "duc" explicitly capitalized. That seems to indicate that the other styles used at the time were also capitalized. BoBo (talk) 11:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• In addition, in Susan Nagel's new biography of Marie-Thérèse-Charlotte of France, Marie-Thérèse, Child of Terror: The Fate of Marie Antoinette's Daughter, Bloomsbury, 2008, p.374, the author does an analysis of Madame Royale's handwriting. She reproduces a letter written in 1804 by the Fille de France to her cousin, Louis Joseph de Bourbon, prince de Condé in which she specifically refers to his son, Louis Henry II, Prince of Condé as, "M. le Duc de Bourbon" with the title "duc" explicitly capitalized. I think this is proof positive that whatever rules Wikipedia may have on the capitalization of the titles and styles of French royalty is wrong and incorrect. Is anyone going to seriously argue that the daughter of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette didn't know the correct way to address members of her own family? If people insist on using a capitalization system that is incorrect for the time they are reporting, I want to know how the Wikipedia policy can be changed. I do not want Wikipedia to be transmitting false, revisionist information. BoBo (talk) 16:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling and grammar are now regularized. We use lower-case letters for French titles. Sorry! Just the way it is. We write in current English. Do you suggest using Old English for certain article subjects? Charles 17:22, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to your question is "yes". I do want the original way that the French royal family used to describe themselves used. Again, I would like to know to whom to talk to in order to get rid of this revisionist system of capitalization. BoBo (talk) 18:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone. Start a discussion at a centralized location and get people involved. It won't change though, when using French forms we follow current French grammar. Today, that is to use an initial lowercase letter on titles. Charles 18:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, see here: WP:MOS-FR#Noble titles. It might be of interest to you. Charles 18:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another example to prove my point about what was current in France at the time that the senior line of the House of Bourbon ruled France. In the illustrations section of Antonia Fraser's book, Love and Louis XIV, The Women in the Life fo the Sun King, Doubleday, 2006, she reproduces a letter written in 1700 from Princess Marie-Adélaïde of Savoy to her grandmother, Marie Jeanne of Savoy-Nemours. On the last page, her style is clearly handwritten (probably by a lady-in-waiting) as "Mme. la Duchesse de Bourgogne", again with the title "duchesse" explicitly capitalized. With this, I think I have clearly established the royal House of Bourbon capitalized their titles.

As for your claim that, "Spelling and grammar are now regularized,", my question is by whom and when? This sounds like a very arbitrary pronouncement. Your reference to WP:MOS-FR#Noble titles isn't very helpful. That is only a detailed description of the arbitrary pronouncement. The following quote is highly suspect:

"in French with capital spelling: Comtesse de, Marquis de... (e.g. Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu; Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon; Constantin-François de Chassebœuf, Comte de Volney). This is a incorrect Franco-English hybrid form using the capitalization rules of an English-user."

The consensus has been that all articles with French titles using de should follow the correct French form with the title in lowercase."

What consensus? By whom? Who are the experts in French history who came up with this? The following famous books in English use this "Franco-English hybridization":

Nancy Mitford - The Sun King, Harper & Row, 1966;

Antonia Fraser - Marie Antoinette, The Journey, 2001;

Antonia Fraser - Love and Louis XIV, The Women in the Life of the Sun King, Doubleday, 2006;

Caroline Weber - Queen of Fashion, Henry Holt and Company, 2006;

Susan Nagel - Marie-Thérèse, Child of Terror: The Fate of Marie Antoinette's Daughter, Bloomsbury, 2008.

If anything, these examples prove that the "regularization of spelling and grammar" in the capitalization of French titles that you claim doesn't really exist. If modern English authors, especially of the quality of Nancy Mitford and Antonia Fraser, use the same capitalization system as did the French royal family themselves, then something is really wrong with Wikipedia policies in this area. BoBo (talk) 19:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many books don't use it? Charles 20:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing my point: there is no "regularization of spelling and grammar" in translating French titles and styles into modern English, so why is Wikipedia imposing one? BoBo (talk) 21:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nagel, Weber and Fraser aren't following it, obviously, because there is one. In French it is not done. Charles 23:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided the names of four authors who are definitely NOT using the Wikipedia standards in their modern English books on 17th and 18th century French royalty. I bet I could find a lot more. That proves my point that there is no "standard" way to capitalize French royal titles and styles in modern English translation. So why does Wikipedia have a capitalization police? Whatever is being done in modern French linguistics should not necessarily dictate how modern English speakers should view French titles and styles that are hundreds of years old. BoBo (talk) 00:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do find more. We use modern French standards when using French because Wikipedia is about using standards. Capitalization of titles is purely POV, your POV in this discussion as well. Another user does not agree with you. French language standards do not agree with you either. We don't write in 17th and 18th century forms because they differ. You are only showing forms you like. How many books and articles don't use the capital? Read WP:ILIKEIT. Charles 00:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your line of argument is internally self-contradictory. Are we writing articles in modern English, which has no standardization for French translation as regards the capitalization of titles and styles, or in modern French, which does? Since we are writing in modern English, your argument about modern French standards doesn't apply. That they should is your POV. So far, I have provided you with examples that show the correct French usage current to the applicable time as well as modern English-speaking authors who choose to follow that system. So far you have provided me with no verifiable references to back up your POV or to show that my facts are wrong. BoBo (talk) 00:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The MOS agrees with me. When we use French forms in English we follow the French way or writing them. End of story. Start a discussion somewhere, no one else is going to pay attention to this one. As for correct French usage, there was no correct French usage. It varied notoriously. You've shown authors who use it but they are authors who don't. Where there are two or more forms we go with the endorsed and correct form. I didn't write the MOS so it's not just my POV. I don't have to prove a thing until it changes. Charles 00:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not treat only the title "Son of France": it should be renamed "Styles and titles of the French Royal Family" with redirects from "Son of France", "Grandson of France", etc. The whole thing needs to be extensively rewritten and reorganised, making a more clear distinction between styles and titles (Son of France is a title, not a style). The more important is to make a clear distinction in the plan of the article between official titles and styles on one side and ways other peoples had to refer to members of the RF in the court context ("Monsieur" and so on: of course Monsieur would never have referred to himself as "Monsieur"). Montjoy Pursuivant (talk) 13:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]