are the locations (datafields & text) and titles (in datafield) ok for Elizabeth de Burgh (1332-1363)?

+5 votes
139 views

I just adopted her profile for the Magna Carta Project & did some updating of her bio. I tend to leave "proper use of titles" to those who know about those things. I'm also geographically challenged. I'm pretty good on what county when for Virginia but Ireland and England... not so much. Specifically, for the locations, are the following ok?

Antrim, Ulster, Ireland for Carrickfergus Castle (1332)

Middlesex, England for Tower of London (1342)
update - deleted Middlesex (see Jo's answer)

Dublin, Leinster, Ireland (1363)

Thanks!

P.S. The titles in the datafield seem a bit crowded: Duchess of Clarence, suo jure 4th Countess of Ulster, Baroness of Connaught

I'm tempted to go with just "Duchess of Clarence", but I don't want to unduly diminish her oomph. update - went with just Duchess of Clarence in datafield; added a footnote ref to this discussion from text that listed them (see John's answer)

WikiTree profile: Elizabeth de Burgh
in Genealogy Help by Liz Shifflett G2G6 Pilot (440k points)
edited by Liz Shifflett

2 Answers

+5 votes
Hi Liz

The Tower of London was a Liberty, an area outwith the local administrative system under the direct control of the Monarch with its own governance, constabulary and guards. It was outside the walls of the City of London.

It wasn't brought into the County of London until 1889.

There is more about it here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberties_of_the_Tower_of_London

So for historical accuracy for Elizabeth's marriage, the location would be The Tower of London, England.
by Jo Fitz-Henry G2G6 Mach 8 (86.7k points)
+5 votes

In terms of titles, if we are going with what she was called in her own time, then I think Duchess of Clarence is most appropriate.

The Complete Peerage, Vol. 12 (2), 2nd ed. p. 180 names her as "apparently suo jure Countess of Ulster, ... heir (it is presumed ) to her father's Earldom of Ulster."

In the order (?) dated 5 May 1341. that she marry the king's son Lionel, when he is old enough, she is named daughter and heir of William de Burgo, earl of Ulster, not Countess of Ulster in her own right.  See here

As she was a minor in the wardship of King Edward III, he would have held all her lands and presumably titles anyway.

If she was known as Countess of Ulster, it would probably have been once her husband Lionel was recognised as Earl of Ulster before 26 Jan 1346/47.

by John Atkinson G2G6 Pilot (464k points)
Her husband was created Duke of Clarence - it was not her title.  I'm sure she was afforded all the courtesies of being the wife of a Duke, but I do not think we automatically call every wife of a titled person by their husband's title on their profile.  She is not the Duchess of Clarence, and I would not call her that just out of courtesy.

This is especially true since she was the 4th Countess of Ulster, 5th Baroness of Connaught in her own right.  Only the highest title should be in the name field.  She should be Elizabeth de Burgh, 4th Countess of Ulster in the name field with any other titles explained in the biography.
Joe seems to have a reasonable point there.

Related questions

+5 votes
1 answer
+8 votes
1 answer
+12 votes
2 answers
+7 votes
3 answers
277 views asked Jan 13, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Bettye Carroll G2G6 Mach 4 (46.3k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...