Humanities desk
< August 5	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 7 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 6[edit]

Yoshitsune (TV series)[edit]

This drama TV is based on Tomiko Miyao's novel. Please, can you help me to find if there is a site where you can read the full book, in English or also in Japanese? Or in alternative a site with plot, charactere, etc.? Thank you.

Yoshitsune is not listed among her novels in her article, though web searching reveals that it was published in 2004, probably in Japanese only.

It is not available at the Open Library, but I am handicapped from further searching by having no Japanese whatever. I suggest you search further yourself (though I would have thought that any free online text of a 2004 book would be an illegal breach of copyright) or track down a copy for sale at one of the usual 2nd-hand sites such as Ebay and AbeBooks. Of course, Japan-based dealers would be most likely to have copies. Best of luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.140.169 (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's Tomiko Miyao's ja wikipedia page, which lists the book thus:

『義経』日本放送出版協会 2004 のち新潮文庫

Which with machine translation I can discern to be:

"Yoshitsune" NHK Publishing 2004 [something] library

Maybe that helps? The [something] is のち followed by 新潮, so I get the idea this says Future Fashion Library or maybe Future New Wave Library. Oh, and this looks like a page about the book on the NHK site. Card Zero (talk) 19:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page says the book is out of stock ("品切れ"). --Lambiam 21:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, 糞! Card Zero (talk) 07:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Japanese Wikipedia the TV series is based on two historical novels written by Tomiko Miyao and published in 2001–2004, 宮尾本平家物語 and 義経. Google translate romanizes the first as Miyao hon hirayamonogatari and the second as Yoshitsune. --Lambiam 21:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This, this and this Amazon page seems to be for different installments of the first novel, whille this may be for the full novel. --Lambiam 21:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also the real Minamoto no Yoshitsune and his trusty side-kick Benkei, about whom there are more legends than facts. Alansplodge (talk) 13:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Camilla Bloggs[edit]

Hypothetical question, but there are rules for these things:

If King Charles were to die, and the widowed Queen Camilla were to meet a commoner, a plumber named Joe Bloggs, fall in love with him and marry him, what would her formal title become, assuming she takes his surname?

My best guess would be: Dowager Queen Camilla, Mrs Joe Bloggs, but that may be way off. I'm not sure whether "Queen Mother" would feature anywhere, as she is not the mother of the next monarch, William V, or even his adoptive mother, but his step-mother. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Queen Step-Mother" has a certain ring. :) --Lambiam 21:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to traditional rules, a woman who re-marries should give up honorifics which were derived from her marriage to a previous husband, but it seems some have resisted... [1] AnonMoos (talk) 04:05, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have any widowed consorts remarried? DuncanHill (talk) 11:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deja vu

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Catherine Parr married Thomas Seymour, 1st Baron Seymour of Sudeley, in 1547. 2A02:C7B:117:5200:9D75:B5AB:7A7:39BD (talk) 11:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Diana remained Princess of Wales after her divorce. The mnemonic for Henry VIII goes "divorced, beheaded, died, divorced, beheaded, survived", so there's scope for investigating what happens after a dissolution. 2A02:C7B:117:5200:9D75:B5AB:7A7:39BD (talk) 12:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neither Catherine of Aragon nor Anne of Cleves (the two divorcees of Henry VIII) ever remarried, though as noted above, his last wife, who outlived him, did. --Jayron 32 13:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, to expand on DuncanHill's question, just in case they were casting their nets wider than queens of the UK or England, Eleanor of Aquitaine divorced one king (Louis VII of France to marry another Henry II of England, so, of course, she was queen even during her second marriage. Instructive is the Empress Matilda, who got her title as the consort of Henry V, Holy Roman Emperor, and after he died, she married Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou, and also served as the disputed Queen Regnant of England for parts of The Anarchy. I'm not entirely sure of how she was known in her own time, but pretty much universally, in more modern historiography, she's simply known as "Empress Matilda", regardless of which phase of her life one is discussing her. She seems to have, in the minds of historians, retained the title even after her husband's death, even though she was later a Countess Consort and a Queen Regnant. --Jayron 32 17:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More widowed consorts that married down: Anne of Kiev was the consort of Henry I of France, and her second marriage was to Count Ralph IV of Valois. Adelaide of Maurienne was wife of Louis the Fat of France, and later seigneur Matthew I of Montmorency, Constable of France. Anne of Brittany may have the record for being queen consort multiple times, having been married, in succession to a Holy Roman Emperor and two Kings of France; she was also Duchess Regnant of an independent Brittany. Mary Tudor was married to Louis XII and later controversially married Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk. Eleanor of Austria was married, in succession to a king of Portugal and a king of France. Mary, Queen of Scots was also Queen Consort of France as wife of Francis II of France, and later married both Lord Darnley and Earl Bothwell. Marie Louise was Napoleon Bonaparte's second wife, she later married two different counts. Emma of Normandy was married to both Ethelred the Unready and Cnut, a double queen consort. Adeliza of Louvain was married to Henry I of England, and later William d'Aubigny, 1st Earl of Arundel, controversially she had no children for Henry (which led to The Anarchy) and later had a whole bevy of them for the Earl of Arundel. Isabella of Angoulême was married to King John, and later to Hugh X of Lusignan, she had an impressive 14 children by both husbands. Isabella of Valois, second wife of the deposed Richard II of England, later married Charles, Duke of Orléans. Catherine of Valois was married to Henry V of England, and later to Owen Tudor. Marie de Coucy was the second wife of Alexander II of Scotland and later briefly to John II of Brienne. Yolande of Dreux was married to Alexander III of Scotland and later Arthur II, Duke of Brittany. And I'm tired of scanning the lists of queens consort, but it should be pretty obvious that it was not uncommon for queens consort to remarry. --Jayron 32 18:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another oddity from English history. Catherine of Valois married Henry V and became Queen Consort of England. On Henry's death she married Owen Tudor. Their son, Edmund Tudor was the father of Henry who usurped the throne at Bosworth Field (22 August 1485) to become King Henry VII. One of Henry's claims to the throne was as a result of his descent from the remarried widow of Henry V. Even for those days that was a bit shaky! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Succession Law in England was never really formally settled until the Act of Settlement 1701, previously there had been occasional acts that established short-term succession issues, like the various succession acts of Henry VIII's time (like the Third Succession Act), or based on the King's own proclamations, or based on assumptions as a result of inheritance traditions as pertains to other property, or by right of "whoever got there first", or whoever controlled the army, or whoever was in charge of the faction that killed the last king, etc. For the first 700+ years or so of English and British history, succession to the Monarchy was not well regulated at all.--Jayron 32 11:57, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the use of "Bloggs" in the title of this section reminds me of a minor incident in Elizabeth Gaskell's novel "Cranford", in which a certain Lady Glenmire (the widow of the late Earl of Glenmire) becomes known as Mrs. Hoggins after her marriage to a Mr. Hoggins. She appears to be happily married, but a certain snobbish element in the village of Cranford is aghast at her decision to place mere personal happiness above an aristocratic honorific ("She, who might have been called Lady Glenmire to her dying day!")... AnonMoos (talk) 13:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Joe Bloggs, analogous to John Doe in the USA. Alansplodge (talk) 10:24, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but the -ogg- may have helped trigger my memory of Cranford. AnonMoos (talk) 21:45, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Proteus, can you help out here? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:54, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see no one has linked Courtesy titles in the United Kingdom yet. Essentially, women can be addressed by a title they hold themselves, or by a ‘courtesy title’ that gives them the same rank as their husband, or that is derived from their father. For example, Prince Edward’s daughter uses Lady Louise because her father is a duke.

The #Divorced_wives_and_widows_who_remarry section is the one we need, but it’s not too clear. If Charles was an ordinary peer, I think Camilla’s remarriage to Bloggs would in theory mean she loses the Queen and becomes the Mrs. But Camilla belongs to the Order of the Garter in her own right, so in this hypothetical case, her highest title would now be her own: Lady Camilla…Shand/Parker-Bowles-Mountbatten-Windsor-Bloggs (I have no idea what her surname is/would be). But as everyone has pointed out, queens sometimes have different rules, case by case…70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:46, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, if she were an ordinary peeress, she would lose any title she gained through marriage and be known by whichever was the higher of any title held in her own right (here, as noted above, her right to be "Lady Camilla [Surname]" as both a Lady of the Garter and a Lady of the Thistle) or any title gained by subsequent remarriage. This was not always the case: peeresses used to keep their titles on remarriage. As the House of Lords held in the Cowley case: "everybody knows that it is a very common practice for peeresses (not being peeresses in their own right) after marrying commoners to retain the title lost by such marriage. It is not a matter of right. It is merely a matter of courtesy and allowed by the usages of society." But this is no longer the practice. The only relevant precedent, Catherine Parr, is therefore not entirely helpful because although she kept her title as Queen Catherine on remarriage, she did so in accordance with a custom which no longer exists. That said, my view (though it is just that) is that the position of a crowned Queen would be different to that of an ordinary peeress. I suspect that she would retain her title, and that (unlike a lesser princely title) it would not be considered appropriate for it to be combined with any lesser style - so I think she'd simply remain "Queen Camilla", rather than becoming "Queen Camilla, Mrs Joe Bloggs". Proteus (Talk) 17:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I guess we'll have to wait for Mr Bloggs to make his appearance in the annals of history for a definitive answer to this question. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Stepmother[edit]

The above thread makes me think — if everything goes in accordance with "the rules", and the Queen survives the King, will the Queen be known as the Queen Mother, or (given the fact that she's not the King's mother) will she merely be considered a queen dowager? Aside from the aforementioned Catherine Parr, whose article isn't particularly enlighting on this subject, I can't find a single English or British queen dowager since 1066 whose late husband (1) was succeeded by his son, and (2) had fathered that son by a previous wife. Nyttend (talk) 01:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it. When King George VI died his widow was Queen Elizabeth, and his daughter was Queen Elizabeth II. Therefore the mother was known as the Queen Mother in the main to distinguish her from her daughter. Should King Charles die and leave Queen Camilla as a widow, she would not be mixed up with the putative Queen Catherine. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Upon King Charles’s death, Queen Camilla could be referred to as “the Dowager Queen” in situations where confusion might occur. Blueboar (talk) 12:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Part of the problem is that rules are developed over time from years of tradition; we've had dozens or hundreds of dukes, viscounts, marquises, etc. which has given history time to develop itself a set of conventions like "How the ex-wife of a deceased Earl will be referred to", because we've had hundreds of such situations. We've had far fewer Queens Consort in such situations, so conventions have not so developed; it's essentially a sui generis situation, so there are no "rules". --Jayron 32 12:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the 20th century we had Alexandra of Denmark and Mary of Teck, who were known as "Queen Alexandra" and "Queen Mary" after their husbands' deaths, so there seems to be a perfectly good precedent. It was only having two Queen Elizabeths at once that muddied the waters somewhat. Alansplodge (talk) 22:51, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2022 September 14#Queen stepmother: the conclusion was that she would be called "Queen Camilla". Alansplodge (talk) 10:28, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]