Talk:Caroline of Ansbach

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Featured articleCaroline of Ansbach is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 15, 2012.
Article milestones
March 31, 2011Good article nomineeListed
September 10, 2011Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article


Added some material to this page -- please note the genealogical sources are contradictory, some assigning Caroline an extra pregnancy[1]. They tend to list William Augustus twice, once with only a death date. I have corrected this in the article.--Marysunshine 05:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Her husband was not created Duke of Cambridge until 1706, and they were married in 1705. What was her title in the intervening year? It is not listed. TysK 06:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

HSH Hereditary Princess Caroline of Hanover, Duchess of Brunswick and Lunenburg would be my guess, however, titles of that era are iffy at best. Charles 06:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Or would it be HSH Caroline, Hereditary Princess of Hanover, Duchess of Brunswick and Luneburg? That would be more in keeping with her husband's title at the time. TysK 05:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, I'm looking more into it, and it seems Hanover wasn't an official title --- I could be wrong though. Another guess would be HSH Caroline, Hereditary Princess of Brunswick-Lunenburg, which was the name of the entire territory called Hanover. Charles 05:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


What languages did Caroline speak? It would improve the article if her language abilities were included. As she was German born, one might assume some form of German and French which was customary at that time. What was her level of English?--TGC55 (talk) 07:16, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello @TGC55:. The answer to your question is that she spoke all three languages: German, French and English.
She was brought up in Ansbach, then part of the German-speaking Holy Roman Empire, so her native language was German. As a member of the nobility, she spoke French, which was very much a lingua franca at that time. There are many surviving letters that she wrote in French, including some to her own children.
When she became betrothed to George Augustus of Hanover (the heir presumptive to the British throne) she deliberately set out to Anglicise herself as much as possible. While still in Hanover, she encouraged British visitors, she read extensively about English and British history and politics, and she even started drinking tea. Most of all, she set out to learn to speak and write in English.
"She employed a Miss Brandshagen to talk and read to her every day in English, unaware that the thickness of the latter’s German accent would leave her with a heavy Hanoverian burr for the remainder of her life. Her English was never perfect, although one commentator credited her with mastering the language 'uncommonly well for one born outside England'".
The above quote is from Matthew Dennison's biography, The First Iron Lady.
Sorry to have taken ten years to answer this question. I'll do my best to answer more promptly another time.

-- Mike Marchmont (talk) 14:01, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Just heard on BBC Radio 4 that Queen Caroline died due to medical maltreatment of an umbilical hernia. She'd developed the hernia after childbirth, and it had gone untreated until a loop of bowel protruded through the hernia (but still under the skin, no doubt). Today a doctor would push the bowel in and patch the hernia, but her physicians *cut* the protruding bowel. And repeated the procedure each day until she died (about 10 days).

Hence the verse from Alexander Pope:

Here lies, wrapt up in forty thousand towels, The only proof that Caroline had bowels. - Alexander Pope, Epitaph on Queen Caroline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I recently watched an episode of "The Georgians", a historical tv series, presented by Dr Lucy Worsley which discussed Caroline's death. It has set me wondering about the accuracy of the account presented here, as according to Worsley she died as a result of the snipping through of the strangulated section of bowel. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 21:09, 7 July 2016 (UTC)


There were Julian/Gregorian changes around her time. Are her vital date given in the Julian or Gregorian calendar? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 13:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

What should we do with dates? I've kept them as they were, which is predominantly Old Style, though the table of Children is in New Style. For events in Hanover after 1700, I've put both.
One allied question: What's Frederick's birthday? Weir says 2/3 November (OS), which would match his article (13 November NS) but Van der Kiste says 20/31 October. DrKiernan (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
London Gazette announces the birth was "a little before Six a Clock in the Evening" on the 2 November OS [2]. DrKiernan (talk) 14:43, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Caroline of Ansbach/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    • I made a few tweaks. Feel free to revert/discuss if you don't like.
    • For an article of this length, WP:LEAD recommends 3-4 paragraphs. The article currently has just two, and they look quite lopsided with one at one sentence and the other at a relatively bulky full paragraph.
    • I attempted to expand the lead. Please let me know what you think. Ruby2010 talk 22:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
    • There are two dab links, one to Charles Maitland and one to Incognito. For the first, I wasn't sure which (if any) it was, and for the second, couldn't decide if you would want to link to anonymity or if there were a wiktionary link that might be better.
    • Lead, "the enlightened court". I think you mean it was part of the Age of Enlightenment, but am not sure. Could we either link or reword?
    • Education, "a desert". Is this link really necessary?
    • I removed the wikilink :) (it was meant to help set it apart from the food, but I suppose that's pretty obvious). Ruby2010 talk 21:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Marriage, "Caroline was also one of the princesses considered for the Spanish crown.[3] In June 1705, Caroline's first cousin, George Augustus," This is an abrupt jump. For a minute I was trying to figure out what George Augustus had to do with the Spanish crown...
    • Done (moved it to previous paragraph). Ruby2010 talk 21:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Princess of Wales, "Caroline struck up a friendship with politician Sir Robert Walpole. In 1720, he and Caroline helped to effect a reconciliation between the King and her husband." Again, an abrupt jump. We were just discussing her children, and then we jump to a relationship with what appears at first to be a random politician. Perhaps a bit more information is needed on how he helped to effect this reconciliation, as well as maybe an easier transition between the preceding paragraph and this one? Then in the next paragraph we make another large leap to her intellect...
    • I moved that part to a previous paragraph to help with flow. Ruby2010 talk 16:05, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
    • A bit more information on how they affected this reconciliation would be nice, especially as King George II is later said to have denounced Walpole over the terms of this reconciliation. Dana boomer (talk) 17:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Princess of Wales: You say that Caroline was aware of George's infidelities, but what did she think of them? Did she not care, did she hate them, etc.
    • From what I have read, Caroline did not seem to mind, as it was accepted behavior for the time. One of the women (Henrietta Howard) was one of Caroline's ladies-in-waiting, and the queen made no objection to their affair (according to Mark Hichens, author of Wives of The Kings of England); he wrote "at an early stage in their marriage Caroline accepted George Augustus had taken a mistress... Unlike her mother-in-law Sophia Dorothea, she showed no resentment, made no scenes and never played the role of injured wife; nor did she take a lover of her own." Ruby2010 talk 21:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Queen and regent, "denounced Walpole as a "rogue and rascal" over the terms of their past reconciliation," I'm not sure what you are trying to say with this? I don't recall reading that George and Walpole had reconciled (just that Walpole had helped reconcile the two Georges), and why did the King think that he was a rogue and rascal?
    • That particular sentence has been revised. Hopefully it should be clearer now. Ruby2010 talk 16:05, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
    • Final years, "against supposititous children," What kind of children?
    • That should be "supposititious", i.e. false substitutes for a child either dead or non-existent.
    • Final years, "My God, that doesn't prevent it". Doesn't prevent what? Was she saying that it was basically the same thing?
    • Having a wife doesn't prevent a husband from having a mistress.
    • Legacy, "It is probable that between Anne Boleyn, who promoted the Protestant Reformation, and Prince Albert, who determined foreign policy," I'm probably missing something very obvious, but what is the connection between Caroline, Anne Boleyn and Prince Albert?
    • They're all consorts.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    • It seems redundant to give full information for the Taylor ODNB ref in both the Notes and Sources sections.
    • No Notes entry for the Maclagan ref.
    • Any particular reason the Williment and Boutell references aren't in split format like the rest?
    • I fixed the ref issues, and will address your other comments soon (at work currently, don't have time :) ) Ruby2010 talk 18:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    • A few points (listed above) that I think could be fleshed out a bit more, but overall good.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:

Overall a very nice article! I had a few comments about prose (with some minor things that I think could stand to be expanded on a bit more) and referencing, so I am placing the review on hold to allow these to be fixed/discussed. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Fixing the article should be complete now. Please take a look at our edits and responses. Thanks! Ruby2010 talk 16:05, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
It looks good. I have made a few final tweaks, and I am now passing the article to GA status. There is one thing above on which I would like to see some further information inserted in the article, but since it really goes above and beyond the GA "broadness" criteria I am passing the article without the information being present. Nice work on this article! Dana boomer (talk) 17:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the review! Ruby2010 talk 17:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Succession box[edit]

You know, I've never liked those instances where a male consort is indicated as the last person to hold the title of Queen consort! I don't think we should say "untitled" either, as he did have some titles, though not related to his position as consort.

I'd prefer using one of the below (or similar). DrKiernan (talk) 18:54, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Title last held by
George of Denmark
as consort of Queen Anne
Consort of the British monarch
Title next held by
Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz
as Queen consort
Title last held by
Mary of Modena
as Queen consort of England, Scotland and Ireland
Queen consort of Great Britain and Ireland
Title next held by
Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz

I am in favour of the second. We do not list Madame de Maintenon as successor of Maria Theresa of Spain; George, while not married to the Queen morganatically, was in a position more similar to Madame de Maintenon's than to a queen consort's, since he held no title derived from his marriage to the Queen. Surtsicna (talk) 19:08, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I would also suggest removing the "Electress consort of Hanover" box. What purpose does it serve? She is notable for having been queen, not an electress. Surtsicna (talk) 13:54, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Immaculate conception?[edit]

By May of the following year, Caroline thought herself pregnant....

Had to smile when I read this. "Thinking oneself pregnant" sounds like mind over matter, or a miracle. Anyhow, the rest of the sentence shows that indeed she was pregnant. Nowadays I think most people would say "Caroline discovered she was pregnant." Sca (talk) 14:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

You are right but I don't think she could have discovered it. There was no way pregnancy could be proven in its early stage back then. Mary I of England thought herself pregnant too yet it turned out to be a deadly tumor. How about "Caroline realised she might be pregnant"? That part is not really neccessary anyway, since, as you say, she was indeed pregnant and eventually gave birth. Surtsicna (talk) 14:28, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Your fomulation would be fine, but maybe the whole sentence is irrelevant? Sca (talk) 01:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Article title[edit]

Why is this article titled "Caroline of Ansbach" when the first sentence of the article tells us that she is "Caroline of Brandenburg-Ansbach"? —Lowellian (reply) 19:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I suppose it's because an overwhelming majority of sources refer to her as Caroline of Ansbach, while "Caroline of Brandenburg-Ansbach" is technically more correct. Surtsicna (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Then the article intro should explain that; otherwise, the article looks misnamed. I've gone ahead and added a small note. —Lowellian (reply) 05:09, 16 June 2012 (UTC)


DrKiernan oops, sorry about ec. for me uncited sources are still sources, but change it back if you prefer, i also used the cite ODNB rather than citation. (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Princess of Wales[edit]

She is the first Princess of Wales to go directly to being Queen Consort. Should this be mentioned somewhere? Robin S. Taylor (talk) 12:26, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Not without a source. Not because it's wrong, but because we don't include every fact about her. We only include the pertinent facts that any summary biography of her would contain. DrKay (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Place of birth; father[edit]

Just looking at the several recent edits, mainly to the second para in this article. There is clearly some confusion about the status of her father and that of the principality where she was born. In fact, Ansbach (or Brandenburg-Ansbach to give it its full name) was part of the Holy Roman Empire - not Prussia. Her father was John Frederick, the Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach. He died when Caroline was three. The Elector Frederick III of Brandenburg became Caroline's guardian and gave her a temporary home in Berlin. When Caroline was 11, her mother married Elector John George IV of Hanover, who became Caroline step-father.

Also, I don't think it's correct to refer to Caroline as a Margravine. Her mother was a Margravine before her first husband's death, and became an Electress after her second marriage. Caroline eventually became Electress of Hanover, but as a result of her marriage to George Augustus.

I hope the above might help with the aforementioned edits. My main source for this is Matthew Dennison's The First Iron Lady (Harper Collins). -- Mike Marchmont (talk) 12:51, 20 July 2020 (UTC)