Corrections to new DNB

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Gjest

Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 23 sep 2005 16:55:01

I have started a page for corrections to the new DNB here
_http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wjhonson/DNB/_
(http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wjhonson/DNB/)

Will Johnson

Chris Phillips

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Chris Phillips » 23 sep 2005 16:55:02

Will Johnson wrote:
I have started a page for corrections to the new DNB here
_http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wjhonson/DNB/_
(http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wjhonson/DNB/)


It is worth sending corrections to the Oxford University Press at this email
address:
oxforddnb@oup.com

They do deal with these (though it's a fairly slow process), and are
updating the online edition regularly.

Chris Phillips

Gjest

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 23 sep 2005 17:39:01

In a message dated 9/23/2005 8:11:19 AM Pacific Standard Time,
cgp@medievalgenealogy.org.uk writes:

It is worth sending corrections to the Oxford University Press at this email
address:
oxforddnb@oup.com

They do deal with these (though it's a fairly slow process), and are
updating the online edition regularly.



Thanks Chris I have sent them my correction.
Will Johnson

Doug Thompson

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Doug Thompson » 23 sep 2005 18:06:45

Here is a copy of a correction I sent to DNB nearly 4 months ago. (Still
uncorrected)

Dear Sirs

There is a rather strange error in the biography of William de Braose

Briouze [Braose], William (III) de (d. 1211), magnate

The very last words are

"John, son of William (IV), died without heirs in 1232."

This is incorrect. John's heir was another William de Braose, well
documented as Lord of Gower and Bramber. See Complete Peerage (GEC).

Regards

Doug Thompson

Todd A. Farmerie

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Todd A. Farmerie » 23 sep 2005 18:17:24

Doug Thompson wrote:
Here is a copy of a correction I sent to DNB nearly 4 months ago. (Still
uncorrected)


If I am remembering correctly, the available version was most recently
updated in May, so that hardly gives them time to verify and incorporate
something you sent them about that time.

taf

Gjest

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 24 sep 2005 14:31:11

The entry for George Freville, baron of the exchequer, calls his mother
"Rose Peyton", apparently based on HoP.

Michael

Gjest

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 25 sep 2005 00:00:35

The entry for Sir Thomas Rempston the younger (d 1458) repeats the
erroneous assertion from the original DNB article that he was a Knight
of the Order of the Garter; this was presumably a conflation with his
father's career (the elder Sir TR was admitted to the Order in 1400)

MAR

Leo van de Pas

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 25 sep 2005 01:41:01

According to my superb book on the Knights of the Garter, Sir Thomas
Rempston was nominated KG ca.1401 and he died in 1406.

And so you are quite correct picking up this error.
Leo



----- Original Message -----
From: <mjcar@btinternet.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Corrections to new DNB


The entry for Sir Thomas Rempston the younger (d 1458) repeats the
erroneous assertion from the original DNB article that he was a Knight
of the Order of the Garter; this was presumably a conflation with his
father's career (the elder Sir TR was admitted to the Order in 1400)

MAR


Gjest

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 25 sep 2005 01:49:01

In a message dated 9/24/2005 4:39:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,
leovdpas@netspeed.com.au writes:

The entry for Sir Thomas Rempston the younger (d 1458) repeats the
erroneous assertion from the original DNB article that he was a Knight
of the Order of the Garter; this was presumably a conflation with his
father's career (the elder Sir TR was admitted to the Order in 1400)


By the way, I had posted earlier a will where a collar was passed on from
grandfather to grandson. Can a position as a knight actually be something
passed on in a will ?

Thanks
Will

Leo van de Pas

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 25 sep 2005 02:13:02

I would say, no, a position as Knight of the Garter is conferred only by
election.
This wonderful book I have does not have a wonderful index. as Rempston,
Thomas is not to be found in the index :-(
Leo


----- Original Message -----
From: <WJhonson@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: Corrections to new DNB


In a message dated 9/24/2005 4:39:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,
leovdpas@netspeed.com.au writes:

The entry for Sir Thomas Rempston the younger (d 1458) repeats the
erroneous assertion from the original DNB article that he was a Knight
of the Order of the Garter; this was presumably a conflation with his
father's career (the elder Sir TR was admitted to the Order in 1400)


By the way, I had posted earlier a will where a collar was passed on from
grandfather to grandson. Can a position as a knight actually be something
passed on in a will ?

Thanks
Will


Gjest

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 25 sep 2005 09:27:03

No, in the UK there are no hereditary knighthoods (other than
baronetcies, and - after a fashion - the KG that the Prince of Wales
received automatically).

According to 'The Order of the Garter: Its Knight and Stall Plates
1348-1984' by Grace Holmes, sometime Archivist to the Dean and Chapter
at Windsor:

Rempston, Thomas #101 nominated c1401; died 31 October 1406.

This work does include biographies in alphabetical order, which serves
as an index per se.

Gjest

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 25 sep 2005 14:56:41

He is in the index of Shaw's _The Knights of England_. There is a "?" for
the date for a number of KG's made at this time, Shaw gives him as after 1400,
May 21. He replaced number 83, John Bourchier 2nd Ld B who died on this
date - 1400, May 21

regards,
Adrian


I would say, no, a position as Knight of the Garter is conferred only by
election.
This wonderful book I have does not have a wonderful index. as Rempston,
Thomas is not to be found in the index :-(
Leo

Gjest

Re: Corrections to new DNB

Legg inn av Gjest » 27 sep 2005 09:35:42

WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I have started a page for corrections to the new DNB here
_http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wjhonson/DNB/_
(http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wjhonson/DNB/)

Will Johnson
Here are a couple of things which look like mistakes, but as I don't

have actual proofs to hand I'll put them here for inspection.

1. In the entry for Ralph de Monthermer (d.1325), sometime earl of
Gloucester, it states that he was father, by his second wife Isabella
Despencer, of Margaret who married John de Montagu. (She is surely his
grand daughter, being daughter of his son of his previous marriage. I
have the birthdate 1329 for her, if right it would conclusively rule
out their version.)

2. In the articles both on Robert I, king of Scots, and the family of
the earls of Ross, it states that the Maud Bruce who married Hugh, 4th
earl of Ross (d.1333) was the king's daughter, who had previously
married Thomas Isaac. (She is more usually given as the king's sister;
the Ross article says she was dead 1329, when Hugh had dispensation to
marry Margaret Graham. The king's daughter Maud, who married Thomas
Isaac, I had as dying in 1353.)

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»