Disputatio:Heleonora (regina Portugalliae et Franciae)

Heleonora? Alienora?

I respect the consensus but we have a quite reliable source (i.e. her tomb) that refers to her as Heleonora. Why not use the name written above her tomb? Amsal 18:15, 10 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Quia testis unus, testis nullus ! Quin etiam, ab anno 2002, scribendo de aliis reginis, permulta documenta tam Medii Aevi quam Aetatis recentioris cum Alienora invenimus. ThbdGrrd 18:30, 10 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Fontes:

• Heleonora regina Franciae
• Heleonora regina... cum Margarita Caesaris amita (Margarita=Margarita Austriaca, Caeasar=Carolus V)
• Heleonorae Franciae reginae... Mariae Hungariae reginae (Maria Hungariae Regina=Maria Austriaca)
• Heleonora Caroli soror... regis Lusitaniae vidua (Carolus=Carolus V)
• Heleonora Galliae Portugalliaeque Regum vidua... Febr. 1558 in Hispania
• Heleonora prius Lusitaniae deinde Galliae regina
• Heleonora Regina Caroli V Caes. soror Francisci I pridem. Gallor. regis vidua

...

Amsal 19:18, 10 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Praeferimus saepius praenomina Latina ad orthographiam normalem reddere: scimus "Heleonoram" formam erroneam esse, "Alienoram" accuratiorem (vide Disputatio:Alienora). Sed, amice Amsal, haec res ponderis minoris est! Paginas utiles scribis; perge, igitur, perge! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:52, 11 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity: if Vicipaedia prefers the "correct" form of a name to the form actually used in Latin language sources, why do the articles Elizabeth II (regina Britanniarum) and Margareta II (regina Daniae) use names that appear on their coins instead of the "correct" forms (Elisabetha and Margarita)? Amsal 19:46, 18 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

It depends partly on the source, partly on the Vicipaedian. There is no single right answer to questions of this kind, and if you look at some of Usor:Pantocrator's discussions you will see just how long it is possible to go on talking about them :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:29, 19 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

To clarify my position, I have no strong view except a mild preference for standardizing forenames where possible. But sometimes it isn't reasonable to do so. This may be one such case. I would not object to a move. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:38, 19 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind calling her Alienora if we decided that standard forms outrank forms used by sources. I mind because we have Margareta and Alienora instead of Margareta and Heleonora or Margarita and Alienora. I'd prefer Margareta and Heleonora but Margarita and Alienora is certainly better than Margareta and Alienora. I don't think it's reasonable to use a name which Latin language sources don't use. There are plenty of Latin language sources (some of which are listed above) that mention her and all of them call her Heleonora. But if standard forms are better, why have Elizabeth and Margareta? Amsal 11:54, 24 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

We may well need to discuss the general issue again one day ... Meanwhile, you have certainly shown that Heleonora is a good spelling to choose in this case. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:21, 30 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

I moved to Heleonora: the sources are certainly sufficient. I dropped "Austriaca", which doesn't seem to be in any of those sources: the pagename is distinctive enough without it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:26, 8 Iunii 2015 (UTC)