Talk:Simon de Montfort, 5th Earl of Leicester

Warlord?

The article opens with the claim that de Montford was "a French warlord". Is this contemporary (and derogatory) term historically accurate and appropriate for Wikipedia? It is my understanding that de Montford was basically a sovereign prince and nobleman, who certainly did not derive illegitimate power from the undue allegiance of military forces. I don't think the term has an appropriate place here. (see Warlord on Wikipedia) Wefa (talk) 16:51, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I won't argue, but this seems like equivocation. If you wouldn't call a man a warlord because he raided his neighbors over superficial religious differences, then on what pretext would you label a man a Warlord? Are you to claim that he's legitimate because his King (read: Warlord) sanctioned these efforts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.168.186.10 (talk) 22:45, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Good point and well said. 2600:4040:476D:F800:F125:30E3:CC59:EAB3 (talk) 03:48, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Refered to Moderator

The external link refers to a page which contains several very significant errors, compressing three generations of the subject and his family into two and mis-assigning the responsabilities for parliamentary democracy as a result. This has just been reported to the webmaster, if he does not react within a reasonable time I would suggest that the link be deleted.

I agree. Simon de Montfort VI was a much better man,and I say this despite his killing many Jews and for mercenary reasons. The Simon de Montfort (IV or V) that this article is about was a monster through and through.

While the authors do convey something of his campaigns against the Cathars and speak somewhat of his brutality, the fact of the almost total GENOCIDE of the members of a Religious Culture in the South of France (and all their neighbors) to satisfy the Pope's orders to kill the Cathars because of his (the Pope's) fear that their FAITH would win more and more converts away from the Catholic church's dominion of Europe if they weren't exterminated; and the fact that whatever de Montfort's personal appraisal of the value or lack thereof of the Cathar Faith he mercilessly pursued their end because of his (de Montfort's) greed for their land is in no way emphasized enough heretofore.

Obviously the Cathar Crusade was ordered by the Pope. That does not justify the carrying out of that order.

A previous writer's belief that Warlord was too harsh a term to describe him should be re-examined. Warlord is too good an appellation to describe the murderer of the Cathars whether answering the Pope's edict was the reason he carried out the crusade against the Cathars or not.

Anyone who does not recognize that both the Pope's edict and de Montforts actions in addressing that edict were blatantly evil is missing the point. Being born of noble blood does not justify the wholesale murder of a gentle community of faith. The Cathars tried to fight back initially but they were no match for de Montfort's forces, which outnumbered the Cathar soldiery greatly. It should be noted that it has been said that when a lesser lord in his company asked Simon de Montfort how they would know the Cathars from the Catholics in the towns they sacked, de Montfort is reputed to have replied to him "Kill them all, God will know his own".

Decapitation at Toulouse

Monfort was not merely "killed in June while fighting in a sortie." He was decapitated.

"A stone flew straight to its proper mark, and smote Count Simon upon his helm of steel, in such wise that his eyeballs, brains, teeth, skull, and jawbone all flew into pieces, and he fell down upon the ground stark dead, blackened and bloody."

reference: Chanson de la croisade contre les Albigeois, ed., P. Meyer, Société de l'historie de France, 2 Vols., Paris (1875 and 1879); and ed. with trans., M. Chabot, Tome I, Paris (1931), 205.8452-6

quoted in Massacre at Montsegur A History of the Albigensian Crusade, Zoe Oldenbourg, Dorset Press, New York 1961 (English translation by Peter Green) p. 198

This isn't 100% certain, because Peter of les Vaux-de-Cernay says that he said a prayer before dying. I think I believe the Chanson, however.

The following words in the article: " He was buried in the Monastery of Haute-Bruyère." are denied by both these contemporary sources, so I have taken them out. If there is evidence for this burial place after all, please reinsert the detail with a reference. Andrew Dalby 18:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Simon I de Montfort

I see new page was created earlier today, Simon I de Montfort. Is there a relationship and, if so, should Simon I de Montfort be added to the Simon de Montfort disambiguation page? Agent 86 01:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm not sure why this guy is titled at Leicester since the older dynasty is in Montfort. Simon I is his great-great-grandfather or something. Adam Bishop 02:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I have serious reservations that Montfort was ever formally made the Count of Toulouse. Would some please reference it.

The Maddicott reference

Please explain why a biography that concerns the life of Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester, is referenced for an article about Simon de Montfort, 5th Earl of Leicester. I'm going to mark that reference as disputed, but I'll be happy to remove the "disputed" tag if it can be satisfactorily explained why this reference is included.--Almirena 11:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I note that someone has simply removed the "disputed" tag without posting here in the Talk section why this was done and addressing my concern that a biography about a different Simon de Montfort should be referenced. I have now removed the reference. I will be happy to see it returned if the person who does so can explain to me why this reference (about a different person) should be included. --Almirena 02:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)