GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2006-01 > 1138512148


From: "Leo van de Pas" <>
Subject: Re: Henrietta Maria
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 16:22:28 +1100
References: <1138390555.797223.61480@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1138391975.313723.147570@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <081e01c62380$c60aa410$0300a8c0@Toshiba> <1138394474.389234.60570@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <084901c62385$38ba16e0$0300a8c0@Toshiba> <1138397064.907080.64950@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <087201c6238f$25ec5aa0$0300a8c0@Toshiba> <1138404521.122650.221160@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1138413212.851978.130940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1138508659.841030.153140@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>


Somehow I feel Richardson is back in cloud-coocoo land.
Are we going to call historical people by how they signed their letters? Not
by the names historical people are known by in history? Lovely mess.......

To be generous to Richardson, we should disallow private letters as people
often would sign letters with terms of endearment. Would that remove all her
letters? Or do we have to be selective? This letter yes, no to that one?

To quote Richardson "To call her husband Charles (the vernacular English)
but his wife Henrietta Maria (the Latin form of her name) is being
irregular." Someone pointed out that the male Henriettus and the female
Henrietta were not used by the Romans, and so Henrietta cannot be the Latin
form of anything. And I thought Richardson knew Latin?

Elizabeth Hamilton wrote "Henrietta Maria", first American edition 1976 SBN
698-10713-6
As far as the index is concerned there is no Henriette Marie, but in the
cover description and the first chapter it is indicated that she was called
Henriette Marie after both her parents. But as soon as England becomes
involved it is Henrietta Maria----"By the age of sixteen Henrietta Maria was
married to Charles I of England..." Henriette Marie disappears. How she
signed her letters is neither here nor there.....

But applying Richardson's rule of thumb, we have to remove entries for
Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Alfred the Great and many more.

Richardson is just being Richardson----thinking he is displaying his sense
of humour. It is funny alright, funny redicilous more like it.




----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Henrietta Maria


> Brad Verity wrote:
>>
>> So for scholars who read and write in English, the correct way of
>> referring today to the woman who was married to Charles I, king of
>> England is as 'Henrietta Maria, queen of England'. This is how she is
>> referred in Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Brittanica, Oxford DNB and other
>> authoritative online sources in English.
>>
>> For scholars reading and writing in French, she would be 'Henriette
>> Marie, la reine d'Angleterre'. If there are any scholars still reading
>> and writing in Latin, I'll defer to them as to how to refer to her
>> today.
>
> In virtually all of Queen Henriette Marie's letters which I have seen,
> both those in French AND in English, the queen signs her name Henriette
> Marie, Henriette-Marie, or H.-M. She does not employ the Latin form of
> her name, Henrietta Maria, in anything I have seen so far. I've also
> found that the queen signed one letter as Marie Henriette, which is the
> way her name is given on her daughter's tomb. I've posted references
> to all of these records on the newsgroup already, which anyone can
> readily consult by clicking on the weblinks I provided.
>
> If you wish to use the Latin form of this woman's name, well and good.
> But, I simply ask that you be consistent. To call her husband Charles
> (the vernancular English) but his wife Henrietta Maria (the Latin form
> of her name) is being irregular. I can't support such an inconsistent
> approach to people's names. And, what ever happened to calling her
> Queen Mary, as she was known to her English contemporaries?
>
> However, if the name, Henriette Marie, distresses you so much, I
> sincerely recommend you find the queen's bones, shake them vigourously
> a few times, and demand that she tell you why she couldn't get her own
> name straight. I doubt the queen will give you any satisfaction.
>
>> Cheers, --------Brad
>
> Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City,. Utah
>
> Website: www.royalancestry.net
>
>

This thread: