Talk:Prince Eugene of Savoy/Archive 2

Eugene's sexuality

Question directed to Contaldo80. Who says Schulenberg's comment should probably read "la petite débauche et la p[ine] au dela de tout."? Eugene's foremost biographer Max Braubach, states in Prinz Eugen von Savoyen volume V, p.412, that Schulenberg's discrete "la p...." meant either paillardise (lewdness) or 'prostitution'. It might also have indicated puterie (whoring). It is a reference to the women who accompanied the soldiers on campaign. This is why the recent addition to this article is 'tendentious'. There is no evidence of Eugene's homosexuality; there are no letters, no journals, there was no chronicler. Public House songs, rumour, hearsay is not evidence. The article could expand on this subject, but not like this. Thank you. Rebel Redcoat (talk) 19:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Because Braubach writing in the 1960s doesn't address the issue of homosexuality, we should not assume that it is not relevant. I accept the point that there is no direct evidence (which in an age when homosexual acts meant death it would be hard in any case to to find outright); yet nevertheless the perception that Eugene was homosexual is fairly widespread. Circumstantial evidence in this case may be all we have. I would welcome your thoughts on what we might say in the article, and how we should present it. Contaldo80 (talk) 13:08, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll get back to you at a later date - I intend to add sources and improve in all ways this article. But I will say that it is not well known that Eugene was gay; perceptions (amongst whom??) are not fact. Rumours persisted from the bitter duchess of orleans for many years, but she hadn't seen him since he left Paris at the age of 19! We must be bound by Eugene's biographers, none of whom describe Eugen as a homosexual. Asexual maybe? 'Wedded to his sword' I think W Churchill described him. His intimate desires remain his own, but of his outward actions evidence must be provided. Bye for now. Redcoat.

"Gay" is a 20th century word so we should avoid that. I admit I wasn't initially sure but since I made my edits I have read some more (recently published) books that suggest there was a common understanding/ perception around Eugene's sexuality - eg Veronica Buckley's "Madame de Maintenon". There are never going to be hard facts in an area such as this, but there will be enough to draw upon to ensure the issue is covered in a sensible way. It's also worth noting that asexuality is statistically less common than homosexuality. Contaldo80 (talk) 09:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

What does Miss Buckley say about Eugene's sexuality and what is her source? What makes her a credible source? Rebel Redcoat (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know - I'll check her specific sources on this. On the whole I find her a balanced and well referenced writer. I don't think Eugene's homosexuality (or at least bisexuality) is really that controversial though - I think it's generally accepted today. Henderson dealt with the issue in the 1960s, although I don't think he came to any definitive conclusion. I'm perfectly happy for the article to raise the suggestion of homosexuality, but to conclude that we can say nothing with any certainty. "Wedded to his sword" - how quaint; I hadn't heard that said before. Contaldo80 (talk) 09:01, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't the section on his personal life be refined significantly? Beyond the question of whether his sexuality was the subject of mere malicious rumors or fact, there are various antiquated forms of psychopathologizing, as in McKay's diagnosis that he was queer because his mother was too cold or permissive. In 1977 (or whenever the first ed. of McKay's book was published) that may have sounded totally plausible. Today it sounds bigoted and stupid.100.33.46.24 (talk) 14:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

"Born in Paris to aristocratic Italian parents.... Eugene's parents came from Italian families"

His mother was of Italian origin but I'm not sure it's accurate to describe his father as simply Italian. Savoy straddled the border of the French and Italian worlds, culturally, geographically, politically and economically. Chambéry, where Eugene's father was born, was closer to the French world than the Italian and he became count of Soissons (a French, not Italian title) through his mother. His great-great-grandparents were Savoyard, Portuguese, French, French, Flemish, Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italian, French, Navarrese, French, French, and a whole lot more.

41.241.56.158 (talk) 20:07, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Olympia Mancini was a member of the Mancini family. Olympia was born on 1639 in Rome.

Jules Mazarin was born in Pescina, Abruzzi, and he was educated in Rome and in Acalá, Spain. After a military and diplomatic career, he entered the service of the Church. He became a naturalised Frenchman in 1639 and a Cardinal in 1641.

Eugene's parents came from Italian families.

And... Harvard University :

" Eugene, Prince of Savoy (1663-1736) was of Italian parentage, born in France " --Daedalus&Ikaros (talk) 22:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Eugene's father wasn't Jules Mazarin. His father was Eugene Maurice - who came from Chambery and was thus not Italian. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The Enciclopedia Italiana di scienze, lettere ed arti, generally regarded as the most authoritative encyclopedia of that language, writes: Eugene of Savoy (1663–1736) Italian general in the service of the Austrian Holy Roman emperor. \ Generale italo-austriaco [1]. In my country, Prince Eugene is considered Italian such as Giuseppe Garibaldi and Dante Alighieri. Bye. --CultureEurope (talk) 16:08, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Italian reference

The article should be linked with Italian History, He was a Savoy, the later ruling house of Italy and, in that time, they were Dukes of Piedmont, one of the most important Italian Region. FYI the "Prince Eugene Military March" is one of the marches of Italian Cavalry, due to the Siege of Turin in 1707 and the Piedmontese Dragoons.

--LorenzoEnciclopedico (talk) 08:39, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

This makes little sense since even Savoy was not fully italian at that time. Eugene was raised in Paris, and spent his youth in France, FRench was his first language, though he also spoke Italian and German. However, he was first and foremost an "Austrian" or "Habsburg" subject, as he only served the military of the Austrian empire. To say that he was italian would be akin to say that Emperor Charles V was German since he came from the Habsburg family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.181.126.68 (talk) 17:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 19 November 2014

The following is a closed 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 not moved. --BDD (talk) 21:02, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Prince Eugene of Savoy → Eugene of Savoy – Per WP:HONORIFIC, this article does not meet any of the exceptions to the rule. "Eugene of Savoy" without the honorific is perfectly common in English sources. (The other exceptions pertain to females, British practices and Burmese.) Srnec (talk) 02:53, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

• I think WP:NCROY is what is most applicable here. Dekimasuよ! 05:25, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
• Along with the previous, Eugene Maurice, Count of Soissons might suggest Eugene, Prince of Savoy, but I am not well-versed in this area. Dekimasuよ! 19:43, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose as, in this case, both COMMONNAME and NCROY concur: he is by far best known to history in English as "Prince Eugene of Savoy" (rather than by the more specific usage based on the actual appanages held by his branch of the House of Savoy, i.e., "Prince Eugene of Savoy-Carignan" or "Prince Eugene of Savoy-Soissons"). Nor is "Prince" an honorific in the sense that term is properly used, i.e. a style -- rather it is his title, which it is common to use in Wikipedia article names, and his honorific as a prince étranger would have been Highness -- which is indeed omitted from the article title. FactStraight (talk) 21:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. Move rationale appears to be based entirely on a misunderstanding of the meaning of the term honorific, which has now been explained. Andrewa (talk) 09:08, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

• No, "prince" used in this way is an honorific, whether it is also a title or not. It would be nice, though, if the article explained where he got this title. I'm having a hard time finding anything about the title "Prince of Savoy(-Carignan)". Srnec (talk) 15:51, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

No, "prince" is not an honorific as that that term is understood in editing Wikipedia biographical articles (and since the word itself doesn't occur in the article, any layman's interpretation of the term is not relevant here). The distinction, and Eugene's title, are fully and plainly explained at NCROY, pursuant to a long-standing convention that WP articles use titles, but not honorifics, in articles: honorifics are only included in info boxes or described in text. Moreover, the grounds cited above to justify moving this article, HONORIFIC, refers to article content, not names, whereas COMMONNAME and NCROY are the applicable guidelines on the names of WP articles, and "Prince" for Eugene meets their criteria. The use of the title prince for Eugene is covered, in addition to NCROY, in the articles on Savoy-Carignano, Prince étranger and Prince itself: It is a default title for non-reigning members of ruling dynasties. Eugene, as the younger son of a younger son of such a dynasty received no appanage of his own (it was expected that he would receive a lifetime church sinecure in lieu of a hereditary patrimony). Had he inherited an appanage, he would have become known by its substantive title -- as was his older brother (Louis Thomas, Count of Soissons) and his ancestor (Thomas Francis, Prince of Carignan). Although that didn't happen, he remained a male-line cadet of the House of Savoy, sovereigns of that eponymous Italian duchy (unlike non-sovereign dukes, such as most of those of France and Britain, whose issue were considered nobility rather than royalty). The title of "Prince" has been conferred on Eugene by his contemporaries and by history. It's not for WP to strip him of it. And to what purpose? FactStraight (talk) 17:54, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

I was tempted to withdraw this move request when I realised how prevalent the current title is in the literature. I was surprised. I've always known him as "Eugene of Savoy". But another editor had expressed the same view some years back (see above), so I decided not to withdraw it. In any case, I am at peace with the current title now.

In defence of my terminology, I prefer the dictionary to "as that that term is understood in editing Wikipedia biographical articles". You seem to be saying that his title was customary. Prince étranger was not a legal rank. Nor was Savoy unambiguously sovereign. In any case, I stand by my use of "honorific"; it does not merely mean "form of address". It may refer to an honorary title used out of respect. And nobody's stripping him of his title! Srnec (talk) 20:30, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: If we have a rough consensus against this move, or even no consensus, we should revisit WP:HONORIFIC, since it seems to some at least to say something that consensus does not support, here at least. So clarification would be good, and possibly also wider discussion. Andrewa (talk) 06:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea to me. bobrayner (talk) 15:29, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. Even a Google Books search for "Eugene of Savoy" suggests that "Prince Eugene of Savoy" is the WP:COMMONNAME, which generally trumps style guidelines.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

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.

Passau

one small detail is wrong in the text. The town of Passau, where Eugene met the emperor for the first time, was not a Habsburg dominion. It was ruled by prince-bishop de:Sebastian von Pötting, who welcomed the emperial court as his guests, after they had fled from Vienna, shortly before the town was encircled and besieged by the Otomans. First the court retreated to Linz in Upper Austria, but small groups of turkish avantgarde cavalry followed, so the emperor fled further west to Passau, which seemed far away enough and also easy to defend against cavalry attacks, since it is almost completely surrounded by water. There he waited for reenforcement troops from the German lands and Spanish mercenaries, who arrived from the Netherlands. --El bes (talk) 08:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)