Talk:Earl of Clare

Use of name Earl of Clare

The Pipe Rolls (e.g. for Kent 1205) refer to 'Comite / Comitissa de Clara' (Earl / Countess of Clare) so it is not just a modern usage but had to have been accepted and fully understood else it would not have been used by the crown scribes to refer to that family in Exchequer records. Prof. Bartlett also refers to them as the Earls of Clare in his New Oxford History of England volume (p212).--Littleangelicrose (talk) 17:09, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

This point has been extensively discussed here. See the archived discussions. MarmadukePercy (talk) 20:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree. The point was argued over at enormous length. The fact that one modern historian follows the usage of older historians adds little to the section in the article. However, you might usefully add your Pipe Rolls reference to the section on this as another example, provided you provide a full catation for your source. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

There are three modern historians who believe in the medieval earls. Add to that the new Oxford Dictionary of Biography, the Domesday Book, (The Suffolk return of the Domesday Survey (c. 1086) (ed. A. Rumble, Suffolk, 2 vols (Chichester, 1986), 67 ~ 1) The Pipe Rolls and the Magna Carta list of defenders. With all due respect this was and still is an unfounded argument and should be reconsidered by the learned administrator.

In addition: the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography states: The barons formed a committee of 25 "Enforcers of the Magna Carta". The information below is combined from the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and "An historical essay on the Magna charta of King John" (Richard Thomson - 1829). They are listed with Thomson's order and spelling, but with certain titles and dates added from Oxford.

1.Richard de Clare, Earl of Clare (d. 1235)

2.William de Fortibus (Forz), Earl of Aumerle (1191-1241)

3.Geoffrey de Mandcville, Earl of Essex and Gloucester (d. 1216)

4.Saber de Quincy, Earl of Winchester (d. 1219) and on to the end.

Sometimes an old argument does not go away because it is correct, though, admittedly, poorly explained in my case, since it was my first article. The old historians, the new historians, the Domesday book, the Magna Carta, and the Old and New Oxford Dictionary of National Biography cannot ALL be wrong and these few editors correct. It is not logical. Thanks for your reconsideration.Mugginsx (talk) 15:15, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Mention of Earl Of Clare

"John, by the grace of God King, be it known that we have granted, and by this our present charter do confirm to our beloved and faithful Richard - Earl of Clare and his heirs".

This is the opening line of Rowell Fair Charter granted by King John in 1204. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothwell,_Northamptonshire

Seems the king thought their was a medieval Earl of Clare?

Maxsgdad Maxsgdad (talk) 02:06, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Charles Henry Browning - bad source fraudster

Charles Henry Browning source was deleted as unreliable; he "made his living off the fashion for royal lineage among Americans who publicized their actual or imagined descent from royal or noble blood [...], relying on the notion of heredity to legitimize their claims to social superiority..." (FYI: http://www.gsswi.org/members/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Fakes-Frauds-and-Forgeries.pdf http://anglo-celtic-connections.blogspot.com/2012/03/genealogy-fraud.html) Lindenfall (talk) 14:29, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

References