Talk:Robert Catesby

Clean Up

I've tidied things up a bit and added in subheadings. The article is very light on details about the gunpowder plot itself? surely this should be the main focus of the article. If anyone has any info please add. I also notice the lack of citations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robkirby007 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

The link to William Catesby is not to Robert's father. I'm not sure how to do the disambiguation here, can anybody fix it? Eixo 01:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Quite right - deleted link.

How were the two famous Catesbys actually related? Jackiespeel (talk) 19:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Date of death

I'm confused - the text states he died three days after the discovery of the plot, surely this was November 5th, therefore he died November 18th....................

Question about Henry Morgan

The link to Henry Morgan does not appear to be right. The Admiral Morgan linked does not appear to be the same fellow who died with Catesby. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.31.200.223 (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Henry Morgan

He was a Catholic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.141.83 (talk) 14:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Is clearly a different one then the privateer so i removed the link —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.169.251.74 (talk) 15:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Lead too brief

The lead is too brief and I think Guy Fawkes needs to be mentioned in the lead as well. His place of birth does not need to be in the lead but I think a mention of Parliament and King James should be there.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:47, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

The article will probably look very different in a week's time. I tend to write lead sections only once the body has been sorted out. Parrot of Doom 13:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually that's an excellent idea. That way you highlight the key parts after they've already been placed in the main body of the article. It's a pity there is so little info on him compared to Guy, his more colourful co-conspirator.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Everard Digby is the one that I find interesting, it seems he had a great deal of public sympathy at the time. Parrot of Doom 13:23, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Would you know if he was related to Jane Digby?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:27, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't, sorry, but if I find he was I'll let you know. Parrot of Doom 15:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I created an article on Mabel Digby, who was related by birth and marriage to the Irish FitzGerald dynasty. The Digbys have been quite notable throughout English history.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Robert Catesby

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Robert Catesby's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ODNB Thomas Wintour":

• From Guy Fawkes: Nicholls, Mark (2004), "Winter, Thomas (c. 1571–1606)", Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/29767, retrieved 16 November 2009 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help) (subscription required)
• From Gunpowder Plot: Nicholls, Mark (2004), "Winter, Thomas (c. 1571–1606)", Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/29767, retrieved 16 November 2009 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help) (subscription required)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:02, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Uncited

Removed from the article and placed here: Parrot of Doom 20:56, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

She brought with her a considerable dowry of £2,000 per year and connected him with the fast-rising family of the Spencers.

This school, founded by Cardinal William Allen for the training of clergy for the English mission but extended to education of the laity, provided an austere and rigorous course of education in scholastic and moral theology, classical languages and the history of the English church. At the time the college used a textbook by the Jesuit Martín de Azpilcueta that dealt with the subject of casuistry, the employment of moral theology to particular cases, and with the circumstances that might excuse a normally forbidden course of action. This may have laid the foundation for Catesby's later theological questions and resolutions regarding the morality of the Plot.

As a man, Robert Catesby, in spite of his religious inclinations, was rich in friends and patrimony, loved and esteemed not only by Catholics but by Protestants for his many unusual qualities both physical and mental, and was part of the glamorous circle that surrounded the court, although in his youth he "was very wild, and ...he spent much above his rate".

However, although this shows that he may have compromised at certain times, it is indisputable that he always remained active in the Catholic cause. As early as 1594, the year after his marriage, he was sheltering Father Henry Garnet and other priests at his house, Morecrofts in Uxbridge at considerable risk. It was to here that Father John Gerard fled for sanctuary after his dramatic escape from the Tower of London in 1597, and where Father Persons' mother was living in 1598, which indicates that Catesby was at all times a highly trusted member of the Catholic community.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Robert Catesby/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nikkimaria (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this article for possible GA status. My review should be posted shortly. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

 Doing... - review in progress, will finish in the morning. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

All things considered, I'm going to pass this as a GA now - consider the below comments as suggestions for further improvement. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Writing and formatting

• "He was shot, and later found dead, clutching a picture of the Virgin Mary. His body was later exhumed, and, as a warning to others, his head exhibited outside Parliament." - phrasing seems a bit awkward here, especially the repeated "later"
  • Reworded slightly. I'm pretty happy with the factual content of the article, but it does need another read-through and a copyedit before I take it to FAC. This was one of the few awkward bits that needed doing.
• "college noted for its Catholic intake" - what does "intake" refer to here? Catholic ideas, Catholic funds, Catholic teachings, Catholic students, Catholic teachers?
  • Almost certainly students and teachers, but since the source doesn't elaborate then neither will I.
• "daughter of the Sir Thomas Leigh of Stoneleigh in Warwickshire" - is "the" needed here?
  • Typo, gone.
• When you say that Catesby reverted to Catholicism after being a Church Papist, what is the implication here? If he was already Catholic (as your note suggests), then how can he "revert" to Catholicism? Did he begin openly practicing Catholicism?
  • Most of Catesby's thoughts and feelings at that time are, I think, speculation. Sources tread lightly around the subject, but it seems that he was probably Catholic and then married into a Protestant family. Whether or not he gave up his Catholicism is unknown (but unlikely), chances are being a Protestant was just a handy way of keeping the government off his back. I don't know a better word than "reverted", can you suggest one? As in "stopped pretending to be a Proddie."
    • Done. Parrot of Doom 09:09, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
• "Shortly after he discovered that his wife had been sent a rosary from the pope however" - phrasing is a bit awkward, perhaps begin with "However,"?
  • Not a fan of however at the start of sentences, I think its ok as it is.
• "Percy was reported to have had a "wild youth" before his conversion" - meaning a conversion to Catholicism? Might want to specify
  • Reworded.
• Should link Low Countries, as American readers especially will likely be unfamiliar with the term
  • Linked.
• Was Catesby's address to Thomas an invitation or a summons? Those words have different connotations
  • Its probably the former but the source uses the latter, I think to imply that Catesby could be quite commanding.
• "Two months later[nb 6] Catesby recruited his servant, Thomas Bates, into the plot,[34] after the latter accidentally became aware of it,[33] and by March 1605 three more were admitted; Thomas Wintour's brother, Robert, John Grant, and John Wright's brother, Christopher." - sentence is a bit long, especially with the notes mid-stream. Also, semi-colon should probably be a colon
  • Agree on the semicolon but I think the length is fine.
• "He decided that the letter was too vague to constitute any meaningful threat to the plan, and decided to forge ahead" - repetitive "decided"
  • Reworded.
• "Late on Monday 4 November...Late that night" - repetitive
  • Reworded
• "at about 6:00 pm that evening" - this would be 5 November? The last date you mentioned was 4 November; though the date is implied, it could be clearer
  • Reworded to clarify
• 36 went to Hewell Grange? The text accounts for no more than 10 conspirators on this journey; who are the others?
  • A motley band of supporters, mostly Digby's men I think. Will check tomorrow.
• "Rookwood. Catesby and Percy were reportedly dropped by the same lucky shot, while stood near the door" - I'm not sure what this means - were they "standing" near the door?
  • Yes, changed to standing.
• Catesby was exhumed, but when/where was he buried before that?
  • Haven't the foggiest, neither have any of the sources. The bodies (stripped naked by then) would have been quickly buried to prevent the spread of disease. Orders then arrive from London, dig them up, chop the heads off, bring 'em to London. Parrot of Doom 22:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Accuracy and verifiability

• Ref 1 also needs subscription
• No Fraser 1999 in bibliography
• Ref 62: formatting
• No Haynes 1999 in bibliography
• Ref 44 is misspelled
• Web link for ref 1 says published 2004 - does the subscriber version say otherwise?
• ODNB refs should all have the same formatting
• Use publisher name instead of URL - for example, publisher for ref 18 should be BBC
  • All fixed, however I always use urls for web sources. Parrot of Doom 23:06, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Broad

• Perhaps mention that he sheltered priests, in particular Gerard?
  • Struggling to find the sources for that, what I have just hints at it.
• If you're going to say that Wintour fought for England in the Low Countries, you need a bit more contextualization - even just a couple of wikilinks or a "during x battle / x war / x campaign"
  • Bit too much detail for this one, maybe in Wintour's article... Parrot of Doom 23:07, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality

No issues noted

Stability

No issues noted

Images

• The lead image is an exact copy of Catesby in the group engraving - are these by the same engraver, or is one a derivative of the other?
  • Probably a derivative but the source doesn't say. Parrot of Doom 23:07, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

recent changes

Before I'm forced to delve into my books to check for mistakes, is there any merit to these changes? Parrot of Doom 18:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I didn't check all of the date changes before I reverted, but certainly the Earl of Essex's rebellion didn't take place in 1602, so no reason to suppose any of the other changes were any more accurate. Malleus Fatuorum 18:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

And a lazy check of the ONDB agrees with this article's claim for Catesby's birthdate. Unless the IP who made the changes comes here, I'll not bother checking. I've too much to do. In case you're wondering, I've had a mad busy summer of work so haven't done much here. I still want to do something on the practice of burning heretics and traitors, but haven't come across the right source material. Parrot of Doom 18:08, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Dubious tag

I tagged "Catesby and Percy were reportedly both dropped by a single lucky shot, while standing near the door." as dubious for obvious reasons; impossible to ascertain after four centuries and local lore (hence "reportedly") is inherently questionable. Quis separabit? 17:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

That's why "reportedly" is used - because that is what was reported. Much of what is written about the Plot is supposition, including the details of who met who and where and why. We only have the survivors' accounts to rely on, and even they aren't particularly reliable. Parrot of Doom 18:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Meddlesome priests

Anyone have a problem with the sentence "James exiled all Jesuits and other Catholic priests, and reimposed the collection of fines for recusancy"? It's been in the article a while, and it's in other articles too, so I assume it's fine. A shorter version will be in the TFA on the 5th. - Dank (push to talk) 19:06, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

References

The Notes sub-section doesn't contain any references, so it doesn't belong in a section called References. And there's no point in having another sub-section called Footnotes, because the notes are also footnotes. Richard75 (talk) 18:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Rubbish - it was in the format commonly used used on many FAs and dozens of other articles. SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:41, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Then it's a stupid format. But if it's in common usage then I'll leave it. But you could be more polite. Richard75 (talk) 20:24, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Notable relatives?

Calling out Kit Harington as a notable relative seems a bit weird for someone who likely has over 100,000 living collateral descendant; chances are he has descendants more notable than Harington. It may be better to title the section "Fictional portrayals" unless we have strong reason to believe there are not notable direct descendants, nor more notable collateral descendants. PoisonedPigeon (talk) 10:31, 30 December 2022 (UTC)