Talk:Empress Matilda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Biography     (Rated B-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. Biography Portal B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group. It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated B-Class) Middle Ages Portal Empress Matilda is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. WikiProject Middle Ages To do:

Contents 1 Biography assessment rating comment 2 Discussion 3 Maud/Matilda 4 Manual move 5 Name info 6 Foggy history 7 Undisputed reign? 8 Visit to Italy

[edit] Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 04:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

What does this mean?

brother William Adelin had perished several years before in the wreck of the White Ship, leaving Matilda the only legitimate heir to the English throne, a fact that King Henry II may have had contrary evidence to.

This seems to imply Henry II had some evidence about his mother not being the only legitimate heir. I have not read anything elsewhere that would shed light on this. This seems confusing, and if it cannot be verified perhaps it should be deleted.

---

Why is she called a queen regnant and a monarch of England when she never was truly queen? Most lists of English monarchs include Stephen and Henry II but do not include her as an actual monarch. Shouldn't she be removed as a monarch? Even she never called herself queen, not even during the few months when she held advantage over Stephen.

the circumstances of her escape were the stuff of fiction - could someone elaborate? RickK 02:07, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC) <ScoobyDoo>Yeh-yeh-yeh</ScoobyDoo> Phil 18:13, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

I don't find any mention of tthis in Cross' history. The struggle between Stephen and Matilda was an on-going back-and-forth affair. Perhaps the wording could changed. It might be better to mention what the "fiction" is, before discrediting it. Decumanus 18:39, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

==

Maud was besieged at Oxford; the circumstances of her escape were the stuff of fiction.

changed to

Maud was besieged at Oxford, but escaped.

Also, it seems to me that the first paragraph is a bit of a mess

Empress Maud (February 7, 1102 - September 10, 1169) is the title by which Matilda the daughter and dispossessed heir of King Henry I of England and his wife Maud of Scotland (herself daughter of Malcolm III Canmore and St. Margaret of Scotland), is known, in order to differentiate her from the many other Matildas of the period.

Think that maybe this could be separate and restated?

Empress Maud (February 7, 1102 - September 10, 1169) is the title by which Matilda, the daughter and dispossessed heir of King Henry I of England, is known, in order to differentiate her from the many other Matildas of the period. She was the daughter of Henry and his wife Maud of Scotland (who was herself daughter of Malcolm III Canmore and St. Margaret of Scotland),

Or something like that? -- St. Weasel

-- St. Weasel

Something is obviously wrong with the math here if she was 7 in 1111 and 23 in 1125... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.108.244 (talk) 19:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I am new to the wikipedia thing and was doing research on female rulership in the early middle ages and had this question:

Is there a reference as to what inspired Henry I to recall his daughter Maud, the dowager Empress of Holy Roman Empire, and install her as his single legitimate heir over other male canidates? As far as I can see, with the exception of a few Spanish Visgothic kingdoms there was no precident for designnating a female heir to rule as Queen Regnant in her own right. Eleanor of Aquataine is the next closest example and her father willed her the succession with an independant duchy. But this would not be for a few years yet.

[edit] Maud/Matilda

Is there a particular reason why this article focuses on (and is titled for) the name Maud? I don't pretend to be a great authority on British history, but in all the reading I had done of the period, I never encountered the name Maud until this Wikipedia article. I did some searches (and I'm not the best internet searcher) and while I did occasionally find hits on Maud, it seemed like a lot of them just came back to this article—there were far more to Empress Matilda. Duckecho (Talk) 4 July 2005 22:14 (UTC)

I understand the concern for ambiguity due to the proliferation of Matildas at the time; her grandmother, Stephen's wife, and a couple of others, but from her marriage to Emporer Henry V, she became styled as Empress Matilda, which would seem to erase any confusion (such as with her grandmother Queen Matilda, and her cousin Countess Matilda, Stephen's wife). Duckecho (Talk) 4 July 2005 22:14 (UTC)

Moreover, there at least a couple of Wiki articles I've seen that refer to her as Matilda in the text even though the wikifying text is forced to be to Empress Maud. Duckecho (Talk) 4 July 2005 22:14 (UTC)

Is there any evidence that Maud was a name commonly used for her in her time? Is there any interest in renaming the article Empress Matilda? Is there any strong sentiment for leaving it alone? Duckecho (Talk) 4 July 2005 22:14 (UTC)

[edit] Manual move

User:Duckecho (since he has now left I guess I can point him out specifically) manually moved this back in July, so I deleted that and moved the article properly. There were some edits made in the past five months that have been lost, but nothing major I hope. (If so, too bad, blame Duckecho.) Adam Bishop 15:29, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Name info

There is more info available at Find-A-Grave. Lincher 16:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Foggy history

Was Mitilda Queen regnant of England in 1141? Isn't Mary I of England viewed as England's 'first female monarch'? GoodDay (talk) 20:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The title of this section says it all. However, I concluded from the text that we should treat Matilda as Queen regnant for the period she held actual power, and, thus, Stephen as not-King ^† DBD 21:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The title of this section says it all. Mary I is the first woman to have been unquestionably Queen regnant of England. However, Jane Grey's claims are sometimes recognised, and Matilda is also sometimes recognised. Michael Sanders 16:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Undisputed reign?

The article says her temporary reign in 1141, wihch is wrong, it was still disputed by Stephen (the true King) and his barons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.124.149.222 (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Visit to Italy

this sentence is unclear: 'in march 1116 Henry and matilda visited rome and tuscany, and she acted as regent in his abscence.' ?? were they together? how did she act as regent if she was in italy with him? clarification is in order.Toyokuni3 (talk) 04:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)