|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Wow. Elizabeth Hall Nash Barnard is thorough, but as far as I'm aware she was never known as such. Lets move this to either Elizabeth Hall, Elizabeth Barnard, or Lady Barnard; and leave redirects for the other variants. As best I can tell she was best known as Lady Barnard and she was born Elizabeth Hall.
- Moving the article to Elizabeth Barnard is a good idea. I changed the lead sentence already because the long concatenation of surnames seemed more like a joke than an actual name. Also, fixed a few spots that called her "Lady Elizabeth Barnard" rather than Elizabeth Barnard or Lady Barnard. Ariadne55 (talk) 16:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
The last line of the main part of the article states: "It is surmised that she is buried in a tomb with her husband"; which one, her first husband or her widower? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 17:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Date of death
There seems to be doubt whether she died in 1669 or 1670.
According to "The Bernards of Abington", p67 http://www.archive.org/details/bernardsofabingt01higg:
Madame Elizabeth Bernard, wife of Sir John Bernard, Knt, was buried 17th February, 1669.
In the book, there is a whole chunk discussing this:
De Wilde [(De Wilde (G. J.), Rambles Roundabout, ' Abington.')]remarks : It is curious that this entry in the register is somewhat cramped and crowded upon a record of the burial of Thomas Hoe, labourer
it is the last in that year (the year then commenced on March 25th), and its appearance almost suggests that it is an interpolation between the burial of Thomas Hoe and the heading of the coming year, 'Anno Domini 1670' ; as if the keeper of the register had written the heading for that year, not expecting other burials. Of this last of the Shakespeares there is no other record. So far as isknown, no stone ever marked the place where she was buried.
Good factual and true.
Second husband's title
Adams is in error when he says (on page 486) that John Barnard was granted a baronetcy on 25 September 1661. I've added a citation to show it was a knighthood. I've also removed the unsupported statement that he sat in Parliament for Huntingdon in 1660 - this seems to be a confusion with Sir John Bernard, 2nd Baronet. Opera hat (talk) 08:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
- He was elected to Parliament in 1664, but for Northampton. Opera hat (talk) 08:51, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Requested move 10 May 2017
Survey of sources in re Bernard—Barnard
cf. the requested move above. I didn't quite trust my memory regarding this, so I did a quick survey of some obvious sources to see what spelling they use.
- Malone & Boswell 1821 (posthumously published) uses Barnard.
- Chambers 1930 uses Bernard.
- Schoenbaum 1987 and Schoenbaum 1991 prefers Bernard but notes alternate spelling as Barnard.
- Ackroyd 2006 fails to mention her.
- Honan 2000 uses Barnard but notes alternate spelling as Bernard and prefers Hall as the headword in the index.
- Nicholl 2008 uses Bernard.
- Pogue 2008 uses Barnard but prefers Hall as the headword in the index.
- Milward 1969 uses Barnard.
- Reedy 2015 uses Barnard.
- Bearman 2012 uses Barnard.
Thus, of the 10 authors I surveyed: 6 use Barnard, 3 use Bernard, and one fails to mention her. Of those that use Barnard one notes alternate spelling as Bernard and two prefer Hall as the headword for the index. Of those that use Bernard one notes alternate spelling as Barnard and none prefer Hall.
Of the relative merits of these authors… Schoenbaum (Bernard) is usually authoritative for this kind of thing, so his usage carries a lot of weight. Malone (Barnard) and Chambers (Bernard) are generally good, but rather outdated, and can't be blindly trusted on this kind of thing unless they address it specifically (their choices of spelling may be essentially random). Ackroyd (no mention), Honan (Barnard), and Nicholl (Bernard) are modern biographers with generally acceptable credentials and reputation, but their Shakespeare biographies all have various shortcomings and can't automatically be trusted for this (much like Malone and Chambers). Pogue isn't really a specialist in this field (they come from the theatre side, not history and biography) so their usage can't be adduced as normative. Milward, Reedy, and Bearman (all Barnard), however, are all modern scholars who specialise in this field. Bearman in particular has done a lot of work on Shakespeare's family, the documentary records relating to his properties, and so forth. Thus these three can be assigned some weight. There is a significant caveat though: Bearman and Reedy could both conceivably have been affected by our article naming in picking a spelling (since neither address the spelling directly, their choice of spelling cannot be assumed to be founded on any particular evidence).
Thus, of the four scholars I would assign the most weight here, 3 use Barnard and one uses Bernard.
PS. I should also note, just to be clear, that this was a quick survey, not a comprehensive survey. It should in no way be taken as if it is the "final word" on the issue. --Xover (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)