Talk:Carlos I of Portugal

Luis II - world's shortest reign

The Guinness Book of Records claims that Carlos died before Crown Prince Luis, and thus Luis succeeded to the throne as King Luis II, albeit for only 20 minutes before he too died. This got him into Guinness as the monarch with the world's shortest reign. Thus, Carlos was succeeded by Luis II, and Luis II was then succeeded by his younger brother Manuel II, all within the space of 20 minutes. Cheers JackofOz 09:54, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

• this does not aply (as i discussed with Jack) because in Portugal the concept of Crown Prince was never applied. Not even the kings were crowned. It might sound strange, but from 1640 to 1910, the queen of Portugal was the Virgin Mary, being the kings her mere representatives. There is not a single book of Portuguese History that refers to Luis II. The Guiness Book reference is at least questionable, not to say silly. Muriel G 20:42, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Since King Carlos's eldest son Luis isn't listed as King Luis II, this must mean that in Portugal (when a monarchy), the idea that the King is dead, long live the King didn't apply (same as in Belgium). Mightberight/wrong, 17:20, 3 November 2005

• If we just say that a reign lasted for 20 minutes (I have also seen this in the records book), do we call this record broken by the Nepalese incident of 2001? --82.134.28.194 (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Option two is spot on. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 17:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Sprot

Because of this silly anon revert war, I've sprotected the article. FWIW it seems to me that the link should go to the non-redirect page William M. Connolley 19:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you 195.93.21.2 20:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

If the real name of this woman was Maria Pia of Saxe Coburg Braganza, why you continue to use here her pseudonym name she used as writer? Justiceiro 17:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The section King of Portugal is quiet reductive of King Carlos as a politician, as a man and of his work in so many different areas. Contrary to the suggested on the page, or the "official history" recorded by the regime for that matter, the demise of the Portuguese monarchy was less the result of the king's personal demerits and more the action of Republican propaganda and other well organised agitators (including "monarchists" - see "Dossier Regicídio - O Processo Desaparecido"). One would expect that 100 years after his death History would be fairer to him than his contemporaries were... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nnrico (talk • contribs) 17:12, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Last Journey of the King

There is one little mistake in the article. The train arrived to Barreiro railway station located on the south side of River Tejo (Tagus). Barreiro was the terminal station of the Sul e Sueste Railway in Portugal. There was a public steam ferry service across Tejo (Tagus) which connected Barreiro to Lissabon. But the king, for sure, had his own transport across the river. The railway steamers operated from Barreiro to Praca do Commercio. If the Royal Family stepped down at Caes dos Sodre it would suggest that they should have probably idented to continue their journey from Caes dos Sodre railway station to Estoril or Cascais. One other very reliable source says that Carol I was assasinated in the north west corner of the Praca do Commercio, at the opening of the Rua do Arsenal on February 1, 1908. There was an "express train" arriving to Barreiro about 16.30 from Casa Branca which had a connection with Villa Vicosa - Casa Branca morning train. It is likely that the special Royal coach was coupled in these trains on February 1. 1908. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.113.77 (talk) 16:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

A move to Charles I of Portugal is being discussed at Talk:Luís I of Portugal. Srnec (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Maria Pia

Some time ago I removed the reference to his alleged illegitimate daughter Hilda Toledano from the article. Her claims were spurious and did not coincide with the life and times of Carlos. User:Anjo-sozinho seems bent on keeping that information in the article. She has her own article and I don't think the matter is serious enough to repeat it here. I don't see the added value in that. I'll wait for other opinions before reverting again. It should at least however be outside of the Marriage & Children section, because it has no business being there. That I will make so. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Bla, bla, bla... the user Gerard von Hebel is always deleting information based on reliable sources just because he (as many other Miguelist hidden supporters) want to hidden the life of Mrs. Maria Pia of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha Braganza, the well famous bastard daughter of King Charles I of Portugal. At the end, they accuse me of being insulting them when they are driving me several times accusations and threats. Wikipedia must be neutral! Anjo-sozinho (talk) 19:46, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

But you use unreliable self- published book. --Yopie (talk) 20:28, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Besides, given the seriousness (or rather lack thereof) of the lady’s claims and the somewhat phantastic elements these are made up off, and the fact that all of these had not even seen the light of day during the lifetime of Carlos (see the wiki article about her) I don’t believe that this is in the scope of this article anyway. I know that Anjo believes that this is all being suppressed by Miguelist forces like me, but I think that Wikipedia is not a poster page for someone’s pet causes. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 00:50, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Anjo-sozinho honestly acts like wikipedia is one giant Miguelist conspiracy to suppress Maria Pia's claims and continuously tries to attack Hebel, which is just unfair. I think consensus here is that the source isnt credible and wont be included - sounds settled to me. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 04:35, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

I concur with these observations. FactStraight (talk) 09:01, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

There's isn't just only one source, but a lot of bibliographical sources supporting that the lady Maria Pia of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha Braganza is an alleged bastard child of King Carlos I of Portugal. It should be mentioned in this article, as it happens in all articles about this Portuguese monarch. Thanks you. Anjo-sozinho (talk) 03:15, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

There are here more sources about the the parental relationship between King Carlos I of Portugal and Maria Pia of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha Braganza:

• Maria Pia of Braganza is presented in the family tree of King Carlos I of Portugal by the renowned historian A. H. de Oliveira Marques in his book História de Portugal - Volume III published in Lisbon, 1982.
• Maria Pia of Braganza was cited as Princess Maria Pia of Saxe-Coburg, duchess of Bragança in CHILCOTE, Ronald H.; The Portuguese Revolution: State and Class in the Transition to Democracy, page 37. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers; Reprint edition (August 31, 2012).
• Maria Pia of Braganza was cited as the Princess Maria Pia in HILTON, Ronald; Hispanic American Report (Volume 10), page 576, published by the Stanford University, Department of Hispanic American Studies, in 1957.
• Maria Pia's life and parental relationship with King Carlos was presented in a popular biography of Jean Pailler published under the title Maria Pia: A Mulher que Queria Ser Rainha de Portugal (The Pretender: Maria Pia, the would-be queen of Portugal), published by Bertrand Editora in Lisbon, 2006.
• Maria Pia's case was studied and presented openly by the famous Portuguese lawyer Francisco de Sousa Tavares and published under the title O caso de Maria Pia de Bragança (13 de maio de 1983) (The Maria Pia of Braganza's case), in Escritos Políticos I, by Mário Figuerinhas, pages 246–251, in Oporto, 1996.
• The author Isabel Lencastre published a literary work resulting from a study done to all the bastards of the Portuguese royalty and devoted an entire chapter to the case of Maria Pia of Braganza. The book is Bastardos Reais - Os Filhos Ilegítimos Dos Reis De Portugal. Lisboa: Oficina do Livro, 2012, pages 211-223.

Thank you for your attention. Anjo-sozinho (talk) 03:58, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Hebel: there are now published many sources and references. That's what Wikipedia needs, not only mere opinions from people who insist on their lack of neutrality... Anjo-sozinho (talk) 04:19, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

There is no consensus about adding this subject matter to the article and certainly not to this section. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 06:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

In fact the consensus here to omit mention of her is the most relevant of several credible reasons why she should not be mentioned in this article. Another is that doing so violates undue weight. FactStraight (talk) 09:01, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

I also don’t see you quoting (chapter and verse) where any of these authors explicitly and clearly assert that this lady is indeed Carlos’ daughter and what their evidence or even proof for that is. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 07:06, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Carlos I of Portugal

My understanding is that Carlos I of Portugal belonged to a Cadet branch of the House of Braganza not the House itself. I'm not a Miguelist. I'd just like to leave this note. With thanks Jccoelho99 (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand why this Talk page mentions other members of the Portuguese Royal House of Braganza-Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. I also still don't understand why this House is not listed properly on this page. A footnote does not make any difference. Carlos I was not a member solely of the House of Braganza in his lifetime. In fact he never was. Still isn't. Will never be. You're tampering with history. Because King Carlos's grandfather was the son of Prince Ferdinand Georg August of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and after marriage to the Portuguese Queen the Houses were joined to become Braganza-Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Is this page not being a victim of discrimination? Propaganda? Jccoelho99 (talk) 22:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

I propose that if you cannot translate the original Portuguese page to English on Wikipedia you delete it altogether. Jccoelho99 (talk) 22:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

My other proposal is you bring in an Italian moderator. King Carlos I of Portugal was the grandson of Vittorio Emanuele II di Savoia first King of Italy. I've never come across a translated Wikipedia page that lists a member of the Noblesse under different Houses in different languages. This is very bad standards. Shame on Wikipedia. Jccoelho99 (talk) 23:00, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

NEUTRALITY. One word. This translation is NOT NEUTRAL. This machine translation proves it https://translate.google.com/translate?&u=http%3A%2F%2Fpt.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCarlos%20I%20de%20Portugal&sl=pt&tl=en Grazie tante Jccoelho99 (talk) 23:25, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Technically, and indeed actually, Carlos I and his relatives were dynasts and agnates of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and recognized and titled as such. For the purposes of the Portuguese dynasty however, they were legally members of the House of Braganza that, under Portuguese law, was called and described as such. These facts are explained in this and other articles, accompanied by a footnote that describes the situation. There's nothing unequivolent or partisan about the matter. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 00:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Bridal candidate

His first bridal candidate was one of the daughters of German Emperor Frederick III, but... the pressure of British diplomacy prevented the marriage.

What was the British connection? Are you sure you don't mean Princess Victoria (sister of King George V) of whom he was also a suitor? Valetude (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

The "British Connection" is that Fredererick III was the son in law of Queen Victoria of the UK! His wife was Queen Victoria's oldest child. 76.202.192.102 (talk) 23:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)