This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) at 09:56, 11 August 2011 (→Infobox for current Incumbent: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:56, 11 August 2011 by Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) (→Infobox for current Incumbent: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Adam37 (talk) 17:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Politics of the United Kingdom B‑class | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Heraldry and vexillology B‑class | |||||||
|
Old talk
Can someone else review because the way I read it our entry is not quite correct. Specifically:
"Our heirs and successors, do give and grant to the said Henry, Lord Howard, the office of Marshal of England, together with the name and honour of Earl Marshal of England, "
The letters patent seem to be readable as the office being Marshall of England the name and title being EM. If that is so the article should probably make that distinction Alci12 17:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I am very confused, as I thought that John Marshal, William Marshal's FATHER (not just his brother) held the office of Marshal for King Stephen, and won the right for his family to hold it as a herditary title. This was the impression I got from Duby's book on William. I don't remember Strongbow being marshal at all. ???? Lordjim13 11:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC) You are right. I cannot see any relevance to his wife's family (Strongbow) any more hence why your comment seems to have been moved into old talk. I have summarised the findings of the newly found article John Marshal (Earl Marshal) who really seems to have laid the groundwork for his son William: the contributor there is clear, as linked with the settlement reached passing the throne to Stephen's arch-rival's son, Henry III in The Anarchy, that under John's tenure it was made hereditary.Adam37 (talk) 17:44, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
always hereditary
was it always hereditary? 98.206.155.53 (talk) 08:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC) Not according to the poorly named Earl part (as it was not at all then Earl) Adam37 (talk) 17:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Lord Marshal
I noticed the following wikipipe in several articles: ]. In particular, the table at the bottom of the article Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Duke of Norfolk is quite confusing in this respect, where the two titles are used not synonymously at the first uneducated glance. Please clarify and correspondingly update the articlesEarl Marshal and Lord Marshal. This usage of surprize piping to the article that does not say a single word about "Lord Marshal" is bad. Thank you, `'юзырь:mikka 01:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- It doesn't help that the wording isn't good: "made it stand for something"? wtf does that mean? --moof 23:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- This has been removed in the light of William Marshal's really well researched article.Adam37 (talk) 17:44, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Modern functions
The article nowhere describes what the Earl Marshal does today. This should be in the lead section (maybe more detailed elsewhere, but a brief summary needs to be there). Hairy Dude (talk) 06:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I definitely agree, I'll divide these sections. History after I'd suggest.
Infobox for current Incumbent
To follow the pattern of the other Great Officers of State pages, I made an Infobox for the current incumbent rather than the first holder of this title (who is still mentionned in the infobox nonetheless). An image has to be found, however. Salvidrim (talk) 09:56, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Categories: