Talk:Gospatric, Earl of Northumbria

Untitled
I don't know whether "Cospatrick" or "Gospatric", etc. is the more common (or "correct") form of his name, but I think "...of Northumbria" is how the article is supposed to be titled by Wikipedia standards. Ardric47 21:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

In answer to the above both spellings are used as is Gospatrick. He had lands in Cumbria, Northumberland/ia and eventually Dunbar and hence appears as 'of' all three. Don't have any idea which name and suffix should take precedence: Gospatrick Maldredson??

In light of the statements 'of Dunbar' and 'born at Dunbar' that appear on the page with the descent shown, in ref to dates prior to 1072, it might be a a bit late to talk of standards. This looks like contamination from multiply circulated hobby genealogy.

Gaels were known to remarry often.

_____________________________________________________

I don't know who is responsible for this article, but it's way off. DocSpenser (talk) 03:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)There is confusion about Gospatric's parentage and descent from Aethelred II, King of England. Crinan the Thane was the same person as Crinan, lay abbott of Dunkeld, but was he the father of Maldred? In Scotland, a thane was often a clan chief and ranked with an Earl's son. Gospatric's father might have been Maldred, but Maldred may not have been Crinan's legitimate son, the half-brother of King Donnchadh. In the 1291 competition for the Scottish crown, Gospatric's direct descendant based his claim upon an illegitimate daughter of King William the Lion. Competitors with a legitimate descent from a Scottish king, even if it was through an earlier king than William the Lion, used the legitimate descent. In fact, the winning claim was based upon descent from King David I, a son of Malcolm III Canmore. Some competitors probably knew their odds of winning were slim, but it was a volatile political situation and anything might happen. In the event, King Edward I of England used established procedures of primogeniture to determine the winner, which turned out to be John Balliol. It makes a lot more sense to consider if Gospatric was the son of Ealdred or Eadulf, sons of Uchtred the Bold.DocSpenser (talk) 03:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Gospatric paid a "fine" to King William of England to succeed to the Earldom of Northumberland. A "fine" is a fee which an heir of a tenant in chief paid to the king before being entitled to take control of his estate. Gospatric was later stripped of the Earldom of Northumberland by King William. He was compensated for his loss by being granted the Earldom of Dunbar by King Malcolm III of Scotland. Dunbar was not as grand as Northumberland. Gospatric may have been related to Malcolm III, though not through the royal bloodline, if Maldred and Duncan I were half-brothers on the paternal side. But they might not have been related at all.

Wikipedia is a great resource, but articles such as this demonstrate it must be used with care. Medieval01 (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medieval01 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, the issues seem to be on the paternal side. Hence, we ought to have the more clear lineage first, followed by that which might be less clear. jmswtlk (talk) 21:38, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Uchtreda of Northumbria - is this article historical nonsense, deserving deletion ?
just alerting potentially interested editors, you can delete this note after five days. Power.corrupts (talk) 23:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Why is William the Conqueror weirdly called "King William" in this article?
Why is William the Conqueror weirdly called "King William" in this article? Noone ever use it by word or in book, and why should this aforesaid unknown name: "King William" outweigh his other KNOWN byname: "William the Bastard" Reckon an agenda to bereave Gospatrick of his Englishness or lessen his Anglo-Saxon roots or Celtic-English roots(?) by making out as if he is something other than English, or a Scot, and furthermore, a non 'Old-English-speaking' one at that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.249.160 (talk) 02:53, 18 August 2015 (UTC)