Rulers for Romania [solved]

10 posts • viewed 164 times

This message aims at: requesting the creation or the modification of a ruling authority

Status: Done
Upvotes: 0
Downvotes: 0

» Quick access to the last post

This is the list of rulers for Romania:

Carol I as Domn/Prince/Domnitor (1866-1881)
Carol I as King (1881-1914)
Ferdinand I (1914-1927)
Mihai I, 1st reign (1927-1930)
Carol II (1930-1940)
Mihai I, 2nd reign (1940-1947)

People's Republic (1947-1965)
Socialist Republic (1965-1989)
Republic (1989-)

Could you please add it at some point?

Edit:
Source: Krause + wiki page (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heads_of_state_of_Romania)
+ Added Aidan's suggestions
King Carol I's reign from 1866 to 1861 should be better described as 'Carol I as Prince of Romania'.

Mihai I's 2 periods should be described as '1st. Reign (1927-30)' & '2nd. Reign (1940-47).He is more commonly known as 'King Michael I' in English & 'Regele Mihai I' in Romanian.

Romania from 1965 to 1989 can be better described as 'Socialist Republic of Romania under Nicolae Ceaucescu',as Nicolae Ceaucescu held power as Romania's dictator until his overthrow in the Romanian Revolution & his subsequent execution.

Romania's post-1989 constitutional name is actually 'Romania' - as 'Republic of' is not actually part of Romania's name.

Aidan.
Thank you for the remarks, Aidan!

I agree “reign” should be used instead of “rule”. It could also be contracted to "Mihai I (1927-1930, 1940-1947)"

On your other points I would however stick to what I posted initially, to be consistent with the Numista rules and with common practice for other issuers:
  • Names of rulers should be in the local language, therefore “Mihai”, not “Michael”. “Regele” just means “the king” so it can be skipped
  • Re. the titles of Carol I, this could even be one single entry for both “domn” and “king”: Carol I (1866-1914). However, there are not so many rulers of Romania anyway, so I don’t think it’s bad to separate, especially since coins are different too. The title in the local language was “domnitor” or “domn” and it was written as “domn” on coins, therefore I think “domn” is the most appropriate in a numismatic context. It does not have a correspondent in English, therefore "domnitor" is also used in scientific texts. Furthermore, Prince translates to "prinţ" in Romanian, which is different to "domn". Anyway, it's getting too technical. For me, any wording is clear “domn/domnitor/prince”
  • I would keep it simple, “Socialist Republic”. “of Romania” is redundant. See other issuers, e.g. “Second Republic” and not “French Second Republic”
  • “Republic (1989-)” should be correct. This is not a list of official names of the country, but of rulers/forms of government. For example in the case of France, there is “Fifth Republic, 1958-”. This does not mean that the current official name of France is “Cinquième République Française”, it simply refers to the current form of government.
King Carol I's coins have his titles as 'Domnul Romaniei' & 'Rege Al Romaniei'.

I think 'Domnul' means 'Lord' in Romanian.

Both 'Rege' & 'Regele' mean 'King'.

Some of King Mihai's coins have his title expressed as 'Regele Romanilor' - which I can guess means 'King of the Romanians' in the same way that Belgium's Kings are 'Kings of the Belgians'.

1947 also had a currency reform of the Leu to replace the older Leu that was hit by inflation.

Of course,the coins dated 1990 to 2004 should be listed separately from those dated 2005 & later.

Aidan.
Aidan,

All the Leu reforms are already in the currency section.

Not entirely sure what your other suggestions are to be honest.
"Domn" indeed has other meanings (lord, mister, god etc), but in this context it strictly means "domnitor/prince", see the article from my previous message. "Domnul" has the definite article included (the prince). Same for "Rege" (king) and "Regele" (the king). Also "domnitor" - "domnitorul", same pattern. But isn't this is a bit irrelevant? If it's confusing, maybe the more familiar "prince" would be better.

So I think the list I proposed should be fine? With "reign" instead of "rule" of course; and either "prince" or "domn".

Regards
Quote: "stratocaster"​Thank you for the remarks, Aidan!

​On your other points I would however stick to what I posted initially, to be consistent with the Numista rules and with common practice for other issuers:

  • Names of rulers should be in the local language, therefore “Mihai”, not “Michael”. “Regele” just means “the king” so it can be skipped

​The current Guidelines says about the title of the coin "The ruler's name should be written in the country's native language."

But we haven't a clear guide with the language of the ruling authorities field. Now native and English/French ruler's names have been accepted. You can find examples in Numista of both types. I think the best option is to follow Wikipedia, they use the names most people (in W. and in N.) look for:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_I_of_Romania
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Ier_(roi_de_Roumanie)
Referee for Spain, Iberia (ancient), Suebi Kingdom and Visigothic Kingdom
Quote: "zegeri"
Quote: "stratocaster"​Thank you for the remarks, Aidan!
​​
​​On your other points I would however stick to what I posted initially, to be consistent with the Numista rules and with common practice for other issuers:
​​

  • Names of rulers should be in the local language, therefore “Mihai”, not “Michael”. “Regele” just means “the king” so it can be skipped
    ​​

​​
​​The current Guidelines says about the title of the coin "The ruler's name should be written in the country's native language."

​But we haven't a clear guide with the language of the ruling authorities field. Now native and English/French ruler's names have been accepted. You can find examples in Numista of both types. I think the best option is to follow Wikipedia, they use the names most people (in W. and in N.) look for:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_I_of_Romania
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Ier_(roi_de_Roumanie)

English names for various monarchs are often more well-known than the native names.

This is very true for the various Popes of Rome & most of Russia's monarchs.

Aidan.
It is very confusing if the same page refers independently to Mihai in the title and then to Michael in the description. For clarity, I would stick to one.

Debating for and against local language or English is a bit irrelevant to me. It could also be in the language it appears on the coins, which might be different to the local language, for example Latin. It could also follow Krause or Wikipedia. But whatever the option, it should be consistent, at least within the page.

I am also an editor of Wikipedia and there are a lot of debates on such topics there too. But Wikipedia is also not infallible and there are often changes in the standards there too. To give you an example:
Status changed to Accepted (Jarcek, 19-Nov-2019, 08:11)
Status changed to Started (Jarcek, 11-Dec-2019, 20:23)
I just added these. Carol I was added twice because of his two titles. Lets see how it looks like and whether it creates any additional problems. If not, this will become new standardized way of adding one ruler with changed titles.
Catalogue administrator
Status changed to Done (Jarcek, 12-Dec-2019, 08:35)
Many thanks Jarek!
Looks good, I updated a few coins already

» Forum policy

Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 08:44.