Talk:Sophia Magdalena of Denmark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group.

[edit] Assessment

Very close to a B. I am only troubled by the combination of focus on sexual information, and lack of referencing. If this were an article on a living person, half of it would be deleted outright. It's not, of course, but I would still like better references, especially for the more scandalous stuff. As is, two books by the same author are given, with no publication information, no specific references within the book, etc. Also, the article could be expanded somewhat about something besides her sexual relations. For example, "she remembered how lonely she herself had felt" - how do we know this? Did she write a diary? Whatever the source, if it was intimate enough to know her feelings, surely it said other things about her as well. Some of the spelling needs work: ingored, priaces, suspicison... --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I have read it through, and i understand your questions. Regarding the more scandalous sexual things, they are confirmed in the cited books, but also well known in Sweden. In fact, when one reads about her in Swedish history-books, the information concentrates on the sexual problems of her marriage. I's somewhat sad, perhaps, but as the main purpose of a queen in those days was to produce an heir, the whole thing was videly and publicly discussed, as was the sexuality of both the king and queen. The whole story, about the late consumation of the marriage, about the fact that count Munck had to sexual instruct them in the "production of an heir", about the rumours that Munck was actually the father of the child that was born, was highly public rumours, discussed even in the papers in 1778; the situation was in fact caricatured; here is an image of one of the caricatures from 1778 in the article about Sophia Magdalena in Swedish wikipedia [[1]] - perhaps that should be included here as well? I don't know. The fact is, though, that she is mostly remembered because of this matters. A second reason for this is, perhaps, that she was a very discreet and quite person; as a queen, she did her ceremonial duties, and then withdraw to her rooms. She spent her spare-time in solitude, and disliked social life, so as a person, she has left few memories in history; it was in fact her more social sister-in-law, Hedwig Elizabeth Charlotte of Holstein-Gottorp, who were the female center of the court. I don't know if she wrote a diary-her lonelyness and isolation when she herslef arived as crown-princess is confirmed, as her mother-in-law hated her and made her own son (Sophia's husband) stay away from her, and when Sophia's own daughter-in-law, Fredrica of Baden arriwed in 1797, Sophia herself insisted to skip the protocoll to make Fredrica feel welcome- this is from the cited sources. Do you have any suggestions of information that should be there? --85.226.235.164 18:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

You want to give better references. Wikipedia:Citing sources explains how, but basically you want to give book publisher, publication date, ISBN, and page number. It's a bit complicated, but useful, do try to read it. I'd recommend citing the pages for specific facts, not just once for the whole book. About the cartoon ... eeeurgh! (and don't look that up in an English to Swedish dictionary!) ... let me ask a few people who know a bit more about historical scandals, and maybe they'll weigh in here. My question about the loneliness was meant to suggest a place to find more information to expand the article with. Whoever said that she was lonely - she herself, or the mother-in-law, or the court historian, or? - is likely to have also said other interesting things about her. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 18:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, there was no need for you to take the image so seriously- the only reason i brought it up, was to illustrate what a large place this affair has in the historical wiev of her. I suppose that picture can be seen as a form of slander- i is merely a contemporary illustration of a very talked about event of the period! I'm sorry if it caused so much trouble. However, Sophia Magdalena was not hated or impopular by the public; it was her husband that was the target. Of course, you are right about the references! Unfortunately, i'm sorry to say that i am too lacy to go through it all. I have at least one book that describes the whole event; "Historien om Sverige; Gustavs dagar" (In English; "The history of Sweden; The days of Gustav", by Herman Lindqvist, published by Norstedts Förlag AB, Stockholm, printed by Fälths tryckeri in Värnamo, 1997. The pages was 154-168, in Chapter 4, with the headline "How is an an heir made? The assistance of the stable-master Munck". I hope this was of some help! Perhaps i should clearify the matter, to distinguish facts from rumours? The king and the queen had not consumated the marriage, which was seen as a great problem, as the country needed an heir to the throne. They did not know each other, and did not meet in private. Munck, trusted by the king, and with a manner that won the queen's trust, was asked to instruct the couple to get close. He helped the king court the queen. The king did not know how sexual intercourse was performed, and therefore asked Munck to be present in a nearby room with the lady-in-waiting of the queen, to be avalible, if the king needed to ask him something. He was called in several times, during several of these occations, and then went in to the bed-room, and instructed the king in what he needed to do. The count describes this in his memoires, adding that he was, in fact, forced to touch them both with his own hands; he describes this in detail. In 1778, the marriage had ben consumated, and the crown-prince was born. Both the king and the queen gave the count gifts for his assistance. This is historical facts. Then, of course, whe have rumours. The gossiping court, the members of the royal family (the dowager queen, who disliked the queen, duke Charles, who had politicall aspirations), the public and the papers, all of these developed the story further, and made up storys about exactly how the instructions of the count was conducted. The storys claimed, that the count instructed the king sexually by actually having intercourse with the queen; the image is an illustration of this, portraying Munck having intercourse with the queen with his penis between the king's legs. Furterhmore, it was said that the king had actually asked the count to make his wife pregnant. This, of course, is higly questionable! There is no proof of these later storys. The wiev of historians is, that although the count was the sexual instructor of the couple, and was in fact sometimes present in the bedroom, he did surely not go so far as taking of his own clothes. I hope this was of some help! As for other things about her, i will perhaps write some later.--85.226.235.164 21:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

That picture seems to have ben inserted now. --85.226.235.206 (talk) 10:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)