Talk:Albyric Drummond-Willoughby, 23rd Baron Willoughby de Eresby

Biography: Peerage and Baronetage / Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

England

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Spelling of name, and 20th or 23rd Baron Willoughby de Eresby

I photographed this chap's tomb today (see right), and the details on the tombstone contradict those in this article (the dates match, so I'm pretty sure it's the same person). The tombstone reads quite clearly "IN MEMORY OF ALBERIC DRUMMOND WILLOUGHBY, 20TH BARON WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBY, AND 3RD BARON GWYDYR. LORD GREAT CHAMBERLAIN OF ENGLAND. BORN DECEMBER 25TH 1821, DIED AUGUST 26TH 1870, AGED 49." The article spells his name Albyric and lists him as the 23rd Baron Willoughby de Eresby (and also hyphenates his surname). I'm not an expert on the nobility so I don't know which is likely to be correct or how and where to check, but I thought I'd point out the discrepancies. Dave.Dunford (talk) 21:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That numbering is probably omitting the suo jure baronesses prior to Priscilla. Lodge's peerage (1832) numbers him as 20th, whereas Cokayne (1898) includes the baronesses and numbers him as 23rd. There seem to be other references numbering him as 21st or 22nd from a quick check of Google Books. Those numbers don't have any sort of official standing—they're essentially a form of disambiguation devised by compilers of peerages—so I think it's best to stick with 23rd as that's consistent with our list of barons. (There are similar issues, IIRC, with the Barons St John of Bletso; the son of the 1st Earl of Bolingbroke sat in Parliament as the 5th Baron, but he predeceased his father and isn't always included in the numbering.) Choess (talk) 22:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks – that probably explains it. I'm glad I didn't barge in and change it in my ignorance. Dave.Dunford (talk) 07:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]