Talk:Earl of Oxford

Untitled
What does it mean "the title is dormant but not extinct"? And my recollection is that the objections to Asquith being made Earl of Oxford came from the Harleys, not the de Veres. Adam 09:30, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


 * It has remainder to heirs male whatsoever, i.e. in default of male heirs of the 1st Earl, it goes to the male heirs of his father, and then to those of his father's father, etc., ad infinitum. As such, somewhere in the world there is a rightful Earl of Oxford of the 1142 creation, but we have absolutely no viable way of finding out who it is. As to the objections, I think you're right &mdash; my recollection is that the de Veres objected to Harley's creation, and the Harleys in turn objected to Asquith's creation. Proteus (Talk) 19:27, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


 * If the rightful Earl at any point was also King of England (or its successors), then the peerage is extinguished. —Tamfang (talk) 18:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

It would follow from what you say about the original peerage, that if there were any extant de Veres, they would be able to claim the title, so it would seem there aren't any (except the character in To the Manor Born). Adam 00:22, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

It dates from before the time when surnames were fixed. Aristocrats of that period often changed their names when they moved or acquired new land (so a 11th century de Vere could move to Anytown and change his name to de Anytown). This means that there's not even any way of finding out the rightful Earl of Oxford's surname, let alone who he is. Proteus (Talk) 09:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)


 * On the matter of the surname "de Vere" or "Vere" I suggest adding a pronounciation note to this article or the one titled "de Vere Family." It is my understanding that the V is pronounced as a W. 72.179.53.2 (talk) 00:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC) Eric
 * The V is not pronounced as a W because it is an English surname only derived from a continental European place name in the very distant past. That place is not known, although it is likely to be Vire in western Normandy. DeAragon 06:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dearagon (talk • contribs)

Is there even any clear evidence that there aren't any male line descendants of the 1st Earl? I mean, he lived in the 12th century, one would imagine it wouldn't be hard for some descendants to go missing. And if it's only male-line descendants of paternal ancestors of the 1st Earl who are under consideration, there is no reason to think that the "rightful earl" will have ever borne the surname "de Vere." john k 07:33, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Duke of Atholl 1913
The Duke of Atholl was a petitioner for the Earldom of Oxford in 1913. I thought his petition went ahead? There were several co-heirs for this title, and that of the Barony of Latymer. George de Vere's eldest daughter Dorothy married John, the 3rd Lord Latymer. Dorothy's brother John, the 13th Earl of Oxford d.s.p.'d in 1526. The Duke of Atholl took his line from Dorothy's grand-daughter Katherine, who married the Earl of Northumberland. The geneology showing this was published in "In the House of Lords. Barony of Latymer. Case of Francis Coutts; of Stoodleigh, Tiverton, in the County of Devon, esq., together with pedigrees, appendix, and documents relating to the preliminary proceedings." ixo (talk) 09:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC) ---

Why "Mortimer" by the way? Harley's page offers no clue. &mdash;Tamfang 18:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

"The family seat is The Manor House, near Frome, Somerset." Which family? The present tense suggests Asquith, but ... &mdash;Tamfang 18:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Earl of Oxford's coat of arms
The woodcut as shown isn't for the "Earls of Oxford". It is specific to Edward de Vere (17th Earl of Oxford) as published in 1574. Perhaps it should be removed or retitled as such. Thanks! Knitwitted (talk) 18:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Descendants
Interestingly, I just noticed on the page for Neville Chamberlain's wife, that her mother bore the maiden name "de Vere" and was a descendant of the 15th Earl of Oxford. If there were male De Veres who were descendants of the Earls of Oxford running around in the 19th century, it's strange to think it remaied dormant. --121.99.126.230 (talk) 10:13, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Anne Chamberlain was indeed the daughter of one Mary de Vere, but this Mary was not a male-line descendant of the Earls of Oxford. She was a granddaughter of Sir Aubrey de Vere, 2nd Baronet, formerly Sir Aubrey Hunt, son of Sir Vere Hunt, 1st Baronet, who (according to our article) "was a descendant of the Earls of Oxford through Jane de Vere, a granddaughter of the 15th Earl, who married Henry Hunt in 1572". This is a perfect example of why one cannot assume (particularly with aristocratic families) that sharing a surname means sharing patrilineal descent. (The most famous current example is probably the Dukes of Northumberland, who have borne the name "Percy" for centuries but who are not descended in the male line from the earlier Percy Earls of Northumberland.) Proteus (Talk) 16:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Dormant?
Westminster Abbey, The National Portrait Gallery, The Complete Peerage (2nd edition) all state the de Vere Earldom of Oxford as extinct (TIME is worse in stating it as in abeyance in 1703). Is there any source that states the earldom is dormant? ネイ (talk) 15:11, 12 July 2024 (UTC)