Category talk:House of Anjou

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's going on here? I can't find the discussion on CFD of the deletion of Category:Plantagenet. What's the story here?

Also, House of Anjou isn't a specific enough category. After the Plantagenet Kings of England lost control of Anjou, there were two separate Capetian Houses of Anjou. john k 02:08, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] reclassification

[edit] House of Anjou

Around 7 Oct 2005, all persons previously classified as "Plantagenet" were moved into the classification "House of Anjou", muddling the contents a bit. Since there is a British Angevin line, and two French royal lines that bear the name House of Anjou, a more specific classification system is needed. I propose something like the following, but would welcome suggestions on naming of categories before starting to institute them . - Nunh-huh 17:10, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

• Category: Houses of Anjou
  • sub-category: Counts of Anjou
  • sub-category: Plantagenet dynasty (or British Angevins)
    • sub-category: House of York
    • sub-category: House of Lancaster
  • sub-category: House of Anjou (senior branch) or French House of Anjou, first branch, or First Capetian House of Anjou or House of Capet-Anjou
  • sub-category: House of Anjou (junior branch) or French House of Anjou, second branch, or Second Capetian House of Anjou or House of Valois-Anjou.

With regards to the House of Lancaster, should we distinguish between the first house of Lancaster (Edmund Crouchback and his agnatic descendants) and the second house of Lancaster (John of Gaunt and his agnatic descendants)? Currently, the former are just in the general category, while Category:House of Lancaster is reserved for John of Gaunt's descendants. A further question is what to do about bastard lines. I think here specifically of the Beauforts. (And then of course there's the Beauforts' bastard line, the Somersets, from whom arose the present day Dukes of Beaufort). I'd suggest that sinister lines should be in their own subcategory as well, and not included in the main category. john k 18:06, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm all for being as specific as we can be. Are there any names we can use for these that are already used by historians? Feel free to add them into the schema. - Nunh-huh 18:24, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Since John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster was the son-in-law of Henry of Grosmont, 1st Duke of Lancaster, the two Houses of Lancaster are not unrelated. Perhaps they should go to the same category. The distinction should be made at the introduction of the category.

The Beauforts and Somersets could form subcategories of their own. Lets say "Category:Beaufort family" and "Category:Somerset family" after the similarly named "Category:Bach family", "Category:Brontë family", etc. The introduction should clearly state who was the "founder" of the family and what was his relation to the ancestral family. However "illegitimate" should be used instead of "bastard".

However the "Category:House of Anjou" name remains a problem. As it currently stands it may as well include the half-siblings of Geoffrey V, Count of Anjou: Baldwin III of Jerusalem and Amalric I of Jerusalem and the descedants of the later. They are also "House of Anjou" Royals after all. User:Dimadick