Talk:Duke of Exeter

Could we have information on whether any of these people had any connection with Exeter, if it's available, please? Thanks. seglea 01:22, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hmm...peers generally don't have much connection to the locations of their titles. In the middle ages, Earls generally had the "half-penny" of their county, but the Dukes of Exeter weren't Earls of Devon. The Holland ones were actually Earls of Huntingdon, and presumably had the income of Huntingdon (and Thomas Beaufort was Earl of Dorset, so same deal). The Courtenays held the Earldom of Devon, and presumably had the half-penny for that county. So probably nothing. john 01:42, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I happened upon a partial answer to your question. The well-known 19th century historian E.A. Freeman wrote a book about the city of Exeter, and on p. 88 he says "The accession of Edward's son Richard to the kingdom again united the lordship of Exeter with the crown. And in his day the name of the city first became a mere honorary title of peerage. The King's half-brother John Holland now appears as Duke of Exeter. But he was not so wholly a stranger as some later lords to whom the city has given a title; Duke John built himself a house within the precincts of Rougemont." see http://books.google.com/books?id=8-MBAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA88 Loren Rosen 18:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Numbering of the Dukes of Exeter
This wikipedia article Duke of Exeter describes the younger John Holland (1395-1447) as the 2nd Duke of Exeter, referring to the title as the "first creation (restored 1439)", an ascription echoed in the article John Holland, 2nd Duke of Exeter, and similarly describes his son Henry (1430–1475) as Henry Holland, 3rd Duke of Exeter. No reference is supplied that I can find to support these ascriptions.

There is admittedly some confusion when titles are restored, and these ascriptions may appear to follow naturally from the creation of the elder John Holland (1352–1400) as Duke of Exeter in 1397, even though the title was later forfeit, then awarded to Thomas Beaufort, before the title was restored to his son, the younger John, some years later.

The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, in its entry for him, describes John Holland (1395–1447) as "1st Duke of Exeter ... son ... of John Holland, Duke of Exeter (c.1352-1400)". Later in the same article, the ODNB also states that "on 6 January 1444 John Holland was created duke of Exeter", not in 1439 (the date this wikipedia article claims the title was restored).

And Burke's Peerage describes him as "1st Duke of Exeter of the Jan 1443/4 cr".

Unless some more modern (and equally authoritative) reference is put forward for the numbering used here in these articles, I therefore propose to amend this article and the articles on the "1st", "2nd" and "3rd" Dukes, to follow Burke and the ODNB. However, I'd like to give other contributors a chance to respond first. Also, I've never changed an article title before, and am a little uncertain how it should be done, as there are probably other references to those articles elsewhere in wikipedia. Advice would be appreciated.

Mike Elston (talk) 15:12, 13 July 2014 (UTC) Mike Elston (genealogist and amateur historian)