Talk:Robert Foliot/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Begin GA review Ling.Nut (talk) 23:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's all this? Another Robert Foliot...?: Ward, Jennifer C. (1995). Women of the English nobility and gentry, 1066-1500. Manchester University Press ND. ISBN 0719041155, p. 23.. Robert marries Margery, gets some land, has a son named Richard, etc.? Ling.Nut (talk) 23:52, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are probably a LOT of Robert Foliots. The Foliots were an extensive family and the Anglo-Norman gentry wasn't exactly noted for its orginality on first names. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Robert you found is the baron of Chipping Warden in Northamptonshire. He married Margery, the heiress of Richard de Reinbuedcurt who died after 1120-1130. (Death date not known). By 1161, Robert is the baron of CW, and became a monk at Warden around 1173. Margery and Robert's son Richard became baron and died 1203. His heiress was Margaret who married a Wischard Ledet. Probably related to the Robert Foliot the bishop and Gilbert Foliot the bishop, based on the surname, but I don't have anything that connects them. (Data is from Sanders' English Baronies p. 33) Ealdgyth - Talk 00:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's a carta, in general? "So too Robert Foliot claims in his carta (1166) that his predecessors had been enfeoffed 'since the conquest of England'"? What does it mean to state that Robert had 15 (or more) fiefs? Another Robert, I believe. Ling.Nut (talk) 01:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
studied in the university of Meldun in France, under Becket? No, this seems to be a confusion with Robert of Melun, plus some other confusion... ? Ling.Nut (talk) 01:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HUH? I just searched the article and there is no mention of Meldun in the article. Nor any mention of University besides the bit about his correspondence being in the Bodleian library at Oxford. Nor is there a mention of carta or fiefs in this article... what article are you reading, Ling? Ealdgyth - Talk 01:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Google books, and JSTOR. The university stuff is almost certainly a confusion with Melun; the 15 fiefs stuff, with another Robert.. Ling.Nut (talk) 01:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How important is it to discuss his Norman ancestry? "The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain" lists Robert (this time no confusion!) as "french, or French-trained...".. Ling.Nut (talk) 01:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's going to be Anglo-Norman at the best. We don't know much of his training, but his ancestry would be Norman (not the same as French). We don't know his ancestry for sure, but a good guess is put forth in the article. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diceto says consecrated at Lambeth; Gervasius says at Canterbury (as this article states). Ling.Nut (talk) 01:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fasti Ecclesiae says Canterbury without qualification. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen a couple sources that claim Robert was Becket's tutor/teacher. More confusion, I'm sure.... ah yes, it seems Gilbert Foliot was Becket's tutor. Ling.Nut (talk) 01:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, possibly it was Robert of Melun that was Becket's tutor at Paris (this is from Barlow's work on Becket) but it's not sure. GF was not a teacher, as he became a Cluniac monk and prior pretty early. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I give up. :-) All of this info is extremely, extremely confused. Next he'll by jumping the Snake River Canyon with Evel Knievel Ling.Nut (talk) 02:04, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL... welcome to the world of medieval history, where everyone has five different names, families liked to name everyone with one or two first names, and figuring out who is who is a whole art form in itself. (See... prosopography) Ealdgyth - Talk 02:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it bears noting explicitly that the bishopric was vacant for 6 or 7 years (some sources say six, others say seven) after Melun, due to the Becket exile. I also think I saw here that Foliot was a "compromise" election; I also saw here that most of the bishops later elected were royal clerks and enemies of Becket, but Foliot was one of the exceptions. Ling.Nut (talk) 12:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for the compromise candidate bit, the source for that is the DNB article used in the article and it doesn't bring out "compromise" Keep in mind that RF left Becket's service very early in the dispute, before Becket went into exile. It's not supported by the sources (including Barlow's biography of Becket) that RF was one of Becket's main supporters. (Barlow says about the immediate aftermath of Clarendon that "First to go were Robert Foliot..." and that's pretty much the last mention of RF in Barlow's biography) It's more likely that RF was either elected by the cathedral chapter or that GF urged his election. I'll try to add in a bit about that, as well as the length of vacancy. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:36, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(As I try to NOT look at the references section) Okay, addressed these. The difference in the vacancy dates is probably how you either round the time or in when you consider the bishopric filled. Some folks consider it filled when the bishop-elect is elected/nominated. Some don't consider it filled until the bishop-elect is consecrated. You'll note there is a year gap between RF's election and consecration. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]