This redirect 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 redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Devon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Devon 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.DevonWikipedia:WikiProject DevonTemplate:WikiProject DevonDevon articles
A number of Qs on recent modifications to this:
Summary
- Can we restore the summary to an actual summary, rather than a summary with the end cut off?
- Courtenay was given leave to enter his estates in 1433, not 1423 - he would have been 9 years old in '23 and so unable to hold land. This is confirmed in the Patent Rolls - CPR 1429-35, p.271.
- The 'court party' of the 1420s-40s was lead by John Beaufort, 1st DUKE of Somerset, not John Beaufort, 1st EARL, who died in 1410. The duke was also Courtenay's brother-in-law.
Minority
- Where is the information on Courtenay's being knighted in 1426 from? The DNB says 1429, and 1426 seems a little young. Also, I somehow doubt he was knighted by Henry VI, as the king would have been four years old...
- Similarly, where has the information on his military service as a boy in 1425 come from? If this information is correct, then we have some wider historical issues. Jean V was not king of France (and, to my knowledge, has never existed) while the actual king, Charles VII, by no means submitted to Henry VI (who would have been a very small child and who did not travel to France until 1431) in Paris.
1430s & 40s
- The creation of the Courtenays as earls was in 1334, not 1355 which is after the death of Hugh (I); the honour of Okehampton was not 'restored' to them, as they had held it since the 13th century at least; the honour of Plympton was also not returned to them at this date - they had held it since the extinction of the Redvers line in 1293; Was Coker a royal manor? Regardless, the royal contacts this might have brought must have been insignificant compared to his role as a peer of the realm.
- If Bonville did indeed align himself with Suffolk in 1444, this needs some background as I don't think Suffolk has been mentioned before.
- The remainder of this section has become disjointed and contains a great deal of information not related to the 1430s or 40s and which is repeated below.
- Courtenay was defeated over the Arundel precedence in 1449. The DNB confirms this and I can find the original reference if needs be.
- Bonville's elevation to the peerage is concerned with a lot more than just parliamentary patronage.
Courtenay and York
- Much of this has for some reason been paraphrased and added to the previous paragraph.
- I'm also not convinced by the Chewton Mendip. In contemporary sources he's referred to simply as Lord Bonville of 'Chuton'. His main residence was at Shute in SE Devon, not Chewton Mendip in Avon.
Crisis of the 1450s
- I'm not convinced by the adding of Bonville Feud to the title. The feud goes back twenty years before this and part of the purpose of this section was to point out the Devonshire violence in its place in the nationwide 'crisis of the 1450s'.
Courtenay and the Queen
- For some reason, half of my original summary has been dropped in here and has rather destroyed the flow of the paragraph.
- Which source/historian suggests that the Prior was involved in the murder? I am aware of the chronicle blaming the queen, but not the prior.
As called for by a rewrite banner added to this article, I have attempted to remove much of the duplications, non-sensical text bald statements and irrelevant text. "The Arundel precedence"??? text was unexplained and non-sensical, thus removed. If someone wants to re-insert it properly explained and dove-tailed into the narrative that would be good. The above noted discrepancies as to the dates of knighting, visit to France etc. have been removed as being too inaccurate to correct without more research. Coker, Okehampton, etc, removed, as dubious factually as pointed out above, and too much ancient background info., not relevant. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 16:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]
