Talk:Elizabeth Barnard

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Page move?[edit]

Wow. Elizabeth Hall Nash Barnard is thorough, but as far as I'm aware she was never known as such. Lets move this to either Elizabeth Hall, Elizabeth Barnard, or Lady Barnard; and leave redirects for the other variants. As best I can tell she was best known as Lady Barnard and she was born Elizabeth Hall.

Without comment or objection ASAP, I'll move this to Elizabeth Barnard. --Xover (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. That's actually the recommended way of doing it. Wrad (talk) 17:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since page moves are a bit of a pain to undo, I figured I'd give everyone a chance to chime in on the best "primary" name to use for the article. If nobody yells wait I'll move it some time this weekend (probably not today; Real Life is interfering).--Xover (talk) 08:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Most people in the project don't even know this page exists. It's pretty new. Maybe leave a note at the project page. Wrad (talk) 16:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Moving the article to Elizabeth Barnard is a good idea. I changed the lead sentence already because the long concatenation of surnames seemed more like a joke than an actual name. Also, fixed a few spots that called her "Lady Elizabeth Barnard" rather than Elizabeth Barnard or Lady Barnard. Ariadne55 (talk) 16:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tone[edit]

The tone is a little odd, almost whimsical at times, i.e. "for all of Judith's children" and "for she had not a single child". Rehevkor (talk) 16:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Burial[edit]

The last line of the main part of the article states: "It is surmised that she is buried in a tomb with her husband"; which one, her first husband or her widower? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 17:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Date of death[edit]

There seems to be doubt whether she died in 1669 or 1670.

According to "The Bernards of Abington", p67 http://www.archive.org/details/bernardsofabingt01higg:

Madame Elizabeth Bernard, wife of Sir John Bernard, Knt, was buried 17th February, 1669.

In the book, there is a whole chunk discussing this:

De Wilde [(De Wilde (G. J.), Rambles Roundabout, ' Abington.')]remarks : It is curious that this entry in the register is somewhat cramped and crowded upon a record of the burial of Thomas Hoe, labourer

it is the last in that year (the year then commenced on March 25th), and its appearance almost suggests that it is an interpolation between the burial of Thomas Hoe and the heading of the coming year, 'Anno Domini 1670' ; as if the keeper of the register had written the heading for that year, not expecting other burials. Of this last of the Shakespeares there is no other record. So far as is

known, no stone ever marked the place where she was buried.

Myrvin (talk) 20:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good factual and true.

Second husband's title[edit]

Adams is in error when he says (on page 486) that John Barnard was granted a baronetcy on 25 September 1661. I've added a citation to show it was a knighthood. I've also removed the unsupported statement that he sat in Parliament for Huntingdon in 1660 - this seems to be a confusion with Sir John Bernard, 2nd Baronet. Opera hat (talk) 08:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He was elected to Parliament in 1664, but for Northampton. Opera hat (talk) 08:51, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 May 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, opposed uncountered, and per section below — Andy W. (talk) 05:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Barnard → Elizabeth Bernard – Sophia Elizabeth Higgins' The Bernards of Abington and Nether Winchendon: A Family History says (vol. i, p. 69): "Lady Bernard spelled the name both ways, but 'Bernard' predominates. Sir John also used the 'e' and 'a' indifferently." If "Bernard" predominates, should this article title not reflect that? On the other hand, she is notable as a granddaughter of Shakespeare rather than the wife of a Northamptonshire squire, so maybe the usage in Shakespearean sources should take precedence. I thought it was at least worth a discussion. Opera hat (talk) 01:07, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per nominator's reasoning: subject's notability ultimately stems from being Shakespeare's granddaughter, and the sources I can recall in that area all refer to her, consistently, as "Barnard". Also, how the subject herself happened to spell the name is not relevant to article naming—grandpappy was rather inconsistent and Elizajacobean orthography wasn't even nearly regularised—it is the reliable secondary sources and what they call her that matters.
    Two caveats though: 1) it's been nearly a decade since I last looked at this so I could misrecall, and 2) I was the one to move the article to the current name (see section above) with the risk of anchoring that entails. --Xover (talk) 04:47, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Survey of sources in re Bernard—Barnard[edit]

cf. the requested move above. I didn't quite trust my memory regarding this, so I did a quick survey of some obvious sources to see what spelling they use.

Thus, of the 10 authors I surveyed: 6 use Barnard, 3 use Bernard, and one fails to mention her. Of those that use Barnard one notes alternate spelling as Bernard and two prefer Hall as the headword for the index. Of those that use Bernard one notes alternate spelling as Barnard and none prefer Hall.

Of the relative merits of these authors… Schoenbaum (Bernard) is usually authoritative for this kind of thing, so his usage carries a lot of weight. Malone (Barnard) and Chambers (Bernard) are generally good, but rather outdated, and can't be blindly trusted on this kind of thing unless they address it specifically (their choices of spelling may be essentially random). Ackroyd (no mention), Honan (Barnard), and Nicholl (Bernard) are modern biographers with generally acceptable credentials and reputation, but their Shakespeare biographies all have various shortcomings and can't automatically be trusted for this (much like Malone and Chambers). Pogue isn't really a specialist in this field (they come from the theatre side, not history and biography) so their usage can't be adduced as normative. Milward, Reedy, and Bearman (all Barnard), however, are all modern scholars who specialise in this field. Bearman in particular has done a lot of work on Shakespeare's family, the documentary records relating to his properties, and so forth. Thus these three can be assigned some weight. There is a significant caveat though: Bearman and Reedy could both conceivably have been affected by our article naming in picking a spelling (since neither address the spelling directly, their choice of spelling cannot be assumed to be founded on any particular evidence).

Thus, of the four scholars I would assign the most weight here, 3 use Barnard and one uses Bernard.

References

  1. ^ Malone, Edmond; Boswell, James, eds. (1821). The Plays and Poems of William Shakspeare. London.
  2. ^ Chambers, E. K. (1930). William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts & Problems. Vol. I. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 91. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  3. ^ Schoenbaum, Samuel (1991). Shakespeare's Lives. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 14, 22, 82, 105, 126, 140, 170, 238, 267, 369, 599, 607. ISBN 0198186185. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  4. ^ Schoenbaum, Samuel (1987). William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press. pp. 319, 362. ISBN 0195051610. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  5. ^ Ackroyd, Peter (2006). Shakespeare: The Biography. Vintage Books. ISBN 074938655X. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  6. ^ Honan, Park (2000). Shakespeare: A Life. Oxford University Press. pp. viii, 400, 450, 452, 459. ISBN 0192825275. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  7. ^ Nicholl, Charles (2008). The Lodger: Shakespeare on Silver Street. Penguin Books Ltd. p. 350. ISBN 0141023740. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  8. ^ Pogue, Kate (2008). "Elizabeth Hall Nash Barnard (1608—1670)". Shakespeare's Family. Greenwood Publishing. pp. xv, 92–98, 205. ISBN 9780275995102. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  9. ^ Milward, Peter (1969). "Some Missing Shakespeare Letters". Shakespeare Quarterly. 20 (1). Folger Shakespeare Library: 84–7. doi:10.2307/2868981. eISSN 1538-3555. ISSN 0037-3222. JSTOR 2868981 – via JSTOR. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |registration= ignored (|url-access= suggested) (help)
  10. ^ Reedy, Tom (2015). "William Dugdale on Shakespeare and His Monument". Shakespeare Quarterly. 66 (2). Folger Shakespeare Library: 188–96. doi:10.1353/shq.2015.0026. eISSN 1538-3555. ISSN 0037-3222 – via Project MUSE. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |registration= ignored (|url-access= suggested) (help)
  11. ^ Bearman, Robert (2012). "Shakespeare's Purchase of New Place". Shakespeare Quarterly. 63 (4). Folger Shakespeare Library: 465–86. doi:10.1353/shq.2012.0054. eISSN 1538-3555. ISSN 0037-3222 – via Project MUSE. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |registration= ignored (|url-access= suggested) (help)

PS. I should also note, just to be clear, that this was a quick survey, not a comprehensive survey. It should in no way be taken as if it is the "final word" on the issue. --Xover (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elizabeth_Barnard&oldid=1205745460"