Monarchs (and leaders) naming

[Third Angel]

Rather than to clutter even more the BIF, and since a discussion to establich general rules on the matter has been called for, I thought I'd open a new thread.

We need to do something or else we will forever be swapping monarchs from one language to another.

And that's only slightly less annoying than the flag bit.

There are at least two issues to be discussed here.

First, we should establish a systematic rule on how a language is to be chosen for monarchs (and eventually leaders) lists.

Then, what of nicknames, do we remove them all, do we establish a rule on which should be included? I'd rather we keep those that are proven to have been used during the monarch's lifetime.

 

[Third Angel]

Yoda, I see that you have submitted those. If we are to keep the historical nicknames, we should keep "sans Peur" which was won during the crusade at Nicopolis, and used thereafter. I'm not too sure about the other too, I'll see what I can find.

Also, at some point I suggested that we don't keep him as "Ier" since the following Jeans were only fantasy, but maybe we need a rule about that too.

And I hope that the Jean II matter is closed:

Yes, i'm not sure what to do but I already said I had doubts and it is certainly the best option to revert to "Jean Ier sans Peur" or even "Jean Sans Peur" only.

So... can we agree on this:

historicalmonarch = {
	id = { type = 6 id = 027000 }
	startdate = {
		year = 1404
	}
	deathdate = {
		day = 10
		month = september
		year = 1443
	}
	name = "Jean [COLOR=Red]Ier[/COLOR] sans Peur"
	DIP = 9
	ADM = 5
	MIL = 8
	dormant = no
}

 

[Garbon]

I don't really see the use of keeping nicknames in their display names. Especially not once they are in non-english languages.

 

[Crookback]

Agreed. Keep nicknames in the remark section; and Sans Peur can be simply 'Jean' so as to avoid the regnal number debate. Besdies, all Jeans after him are fantasy so it's less of a problem.

 

[Toio]

Is this thread only for monarch's or/and leader names as well?

 

[Crookback]

I think you could get away with discussing leaders as well.

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Descriptions will often (if not always) refer to nicknames anyway.

 

[Crookback]

Yoda, Garbon... can we have a (final, for now) vote on nicknames?

Garbon doesn't appear to agree, neither do I, and Yoda's already removed them in the latest beta.

Can we confirm here that they are to be relegated to the remarks section? Secondly (and perhaps more controversially), where do we draw the line at which - if any - nicknames should be kept? For example, Philip the Good & Charles the Bold have gone, but William (and Maurice) of Orange remain...

What's the plan?

 

[Garbon]

"Of Orange" isn't a nickname. That's a dynasty name...much in the same vein as saying Oliver Cromwell when said person is not in possession of a crown.

 

[Crookback]

"Of Orange" isn't a nickname. That's a dynasty name...much in the same vein as saying Oliver Cromwell when said person is not in possession of a crown.

Yeah, perhaps a bad example, but I was getting at him being called 'Willem I' in so far as his successor was 'Willem II'

 

[Garbon]

Yeah, perhaps a bad example, but I was getting at him being called 'Willem I' in so far as his successor was 'Willem II'

I don't know though. Do people (non-royalty) usually put an "I" to their name? Seems like that only crops up in the second generation.

 

[Toio]

This naming ie numbers, should be limited to certain states, Some nations never used these roman numerals.

Granted we need to add these Roman numerals to states that had the same monarch's name but might be separated by 100 years or so.

Plus I would like in the remarks notes the house that this king came from, like James house of Stuart etc

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Plus I would like in the remarks notes the house that this king came from, like James house of Stuart etc

I try to maintain this information with separators. Many files are constructed with separators for dynasties and following comment for the name of the dynasty.

 

[Toio]

I try to maintain this information with separators. Many files are constructed with separators for dynasties and following comment for the name of the dynasty.

oops, i did not carry them across for my new SWE monarchs

 

[unmerged(40707)]

Yes... I saw. But I think I figured out where changes were to be applied. Use of yellow according to beta 2 and CODE markup could have helped me... a lot.

 

[Crookback]

@ Toio, this could be easily done; I've certainly done so in the latest monarchs.ENG (available in Beta2) - I can do so for other files as well should that be the preferred option.

@ Garbon, the trend is to use no numerals if there was only ever one ruler of that name (ie, 'Jane' (ENG), 'Luis' (SPA) but if there were later monarchs by that name then they should have a numeral, which would include Willem van Oranje. HOL is a unique case though, as they had stadtholders and then kings, the latter beginning with 'Willem I' - I'm not sure what to do about this but at present we have 'Willem I' (Willem van Oranje) - 'Willem V' and then just start again with 'Willem I' (Willem V van Oranje)

EDIT: if we are to assume that none of the stadtholders had a crown (and thus were non-royalty, as you say) then they should all have their names and Roman numerals, presumably? The numerals because we have five in a row so we need to tell them apart. Thus, I refer you to my original changes in the Holland thread.

I suggest Willem van Oranje, Maurice van Oranje, F.H. van Oranje-Nassau, then Willem II - Willem V van Oranje-Nassau, ending with simply 'Willem I' when the last stadtholder becomes King of the Netherlands.

 

[Toio]

Yes... I saw. But I think I figured out where changes were to be applied. Use of yellow according to beta 2 and CODE markup could have helped me... a lot.

yes, but I did most from scratch till about 1600

 

[Third Angel]

So, can we all agree on the following points, for now:

* for monarchs' names, the language that was used at court, or by the country's political elites if there was no real court, is to be used, in its modern form.

* all nicknames are to be relegated to the remark entry. (I was actually against this but it looks like that's the consensus)

* numerals are to be used heedlessly of fantasy occurences of the name; also, there should be no "I" or "Ier" when there is only one occurence during the country's entire existence.

This naming ie numbers, should be limited to certain states, Some nations never used these roman numerals.

[...]

Could you please expand your thoughts on this, do you have any examples in mind?

Is this thread only for monarch's or/and leader names as well?

Like the title says, the thread is also concerned with leaders' names. Do you think any of the rules above should be different when it comes to leaders? Bordic, I think, mentioned the fact that some leaders may have been mostly known by their nicknames.


Also, from the BIF thread:

On that note, I'd like to suggest that we revert the Navarre monarchs back to their pre-Basque forms. There has been no evidence to show that the Basque language is appropriate and we know that many of those monarchs were heavily involved with French politics.

Provided that rule #1 is applied, I have very strong doubts that basque was used in the Navarrese court at any point in our time frame, so I agree.
Now, I know you dislike being considered as the memory of this forum but I, personnally, have no idea what the "pre-basque forms" were. Shouldn't Castilian be used for a time, before French is?

 

[Crookback]

* for monarchs' names, the language that was used at court, or by the country's political elites if there was no real court, is to be used, in its modern form.

Agreed.

* all nicknames are to be relegated to the remark entry. (I was actually against this but it looks like that's the consensus)

Agreed.

* numerals are to be used heedlessly of fantasy occurences of the name; also, there should be no "I" or "Ier" when there is only one occurence during the country's entire existence.

My thoughts on this are: disregard examples of "I", "Ier" and other variations of the first monarch of a name - only history itself (hindsight, in other words) tells us that another of the same name ever succeeded; in straight game terms, we do not.

So, as an example for FRA, I'd go with "François" and then "François II" for his grandson.

This also solves the problem of fantasy (either * or ° ) monarchs of the second of their name succeeding historical ones.

Still, this is only my opinion, and I certainly agree we keep what has hitherto been suggested by consensus, as Third Angels says in the OP.

 

[Garbon]

Now, I know you dislike being considered as the memory of this forum but I, personnally, have no idea what the "pre-basque forms" were. Shouldn't Castilian be used for a time, before French is?

I don't remember...I think they might have all been in French, but yeah I think they should probably be in Spanish first and then change...although we don't really have any other cases like that in the game...do we?