User talk:2A00:23C4:1132:7B00:646B:1F3C:422F:556D

William Fitz Osbert's place of execution
Hi Folks,

This article says that he was executed at Tyburn, but there is no evidence as to where it took place.

The source [6] cited in this article is available here, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/camden-record-soc/vol53. The entry in the chronicle tersely reads "In this yere was one William with the long berde taken out of Bowe churche and put to dethe for herysey." I've also checked the preface; I can't find any mention by the 19thC writer of Tyburn. Ergo, I've no idea why wiki is stating this as a fact, nor why it is attributed to this book.

John Stow also mentions this incident in His Survey of London. The details of his entry make it clear that he used as a source Historia rerum anglicarum, which is used for most of the source citations here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fitz_Osbert. I've checked that too; although Stow claims the Smithfield Elms is where he was taken, again there is no place of execution given in the original chronicle (and that was written within a couple of years of Fitz Osbert's execution).

The page & table as they stand are incorrect in giving Fitz Osbert's place of execution. There is no evidence I can find of where it occurred. I am not a registered user, my wiki editing skills are shaky (i.e. table!), and I am unsure how best to proceed. Simply delete any mention of him? I'm sure if I write "It has been claimed..." I'll get a blue "By who?" next to it; well, by THIS article, which I can hardly cite, can I? "A previous version of this article made a claim that... blah... but there seems to be no mention in source material of where it took place." Would you be happy with that?

Hopefully, someone more skilled with wiki than I will happen upon this & make a decision. I'll check back when I remember (in a couple of weeks or more), and if nothing has been done, I'll attempt an edit myself to try to force a decision from someone. But hopefully, one of you folk spots this first! And either way, if someone could post a response here so I know what has / has not been decided...

Regards,

2A00:23C4:1132:7B00:646B:1F3C:422F:556D (talk) 12:23, 19 August 2021 (UTC)Rædwulf

Found it!
But can't read it... :/ This website, https://www.tyburnconvent.org.uk/tyburn-tree, claims that reference to this is made by Ralph of Diceto. Looked for him, found the book here, https://archive.org/details/radulfidedicetod02dice/page/142/mode/2up?view=theater, but it's in Latin. On P.143 is the following passage:

"Extractus ab ecclesia, perductus est ad Turrim Lundoniae, calculum reportans diffinitivum, et ut unius poena metus possit esse multorum, de communi sententia proceram vestibus exspoliatus, manibus vinctis a tergo, pedibus longis funibus colligatis, equi ministerio per mediam civitatem trahitur ad furcas prope Tyburnam. Suspensus est itaque, ferreis constrictus cathenis ne cito corrueret. Appensi sunt cum eo novem ejusdem litis consortes, ut quos par facinus aequarat et inquinaverat, similis poena constringeret."

The note in English in the side column says "He is dragged to Tyburn and hanged with nine of his accomplices." The number of accomplices is corroborated by Newbergh. My Latin is non-existent, but Google translation produces,

"Has been removed from the church, were brought right to the Tower of London, a calculation carried with definitive, analytical, and so that the punishment of the fear can be of many, of the usually accepted idea of ​​tall clothes, and spoiled evermore, and, with his hands tied behind the back, legs long holden with the cords gather in multitude, with horses to the ministry through the midst of the city, is drawn to the gallows near Tyburn . So they hanged, bound with iron chain, it be not quickly collapse. To share in nine of the same suit are with him, were hung, so that those whom a crime aequarat, and a pair of inquinaverat, had a similar punishment bind them in."

So it looks like there IS a source for the claim, but your [6] citation is wrong. I'll leave it to someone else to do the honours though, as I'm still not quite sure how you would prefer to alter things, nor whether this is a solid enough source. Ralph de Diceto died around 1202, so as with Newbergh, he is contemporary with events, but the wiki entry pretty much says he is a bit unreliable, "the Ymagines are a valuable though a secondary source".

Regards,

2A00:23C4:1132:7B00:646B:1F3C:422F:556D (talk) 14:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC) Rædwulf