Talk:William de Braose, 7th Baron Abergavenny

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage.

[edit] de Burgh(?)

"Instead, he evidently wanted to break de Burgh, and to that end invaded Wales to seize the de Braose domains there."

Is the "de Burgh" here a typo for de Braose or does it refer to Hubert de Burgh? If it refers to Hubert, the connection should be explained. Rhion 11:30, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

No reply so I've changed it to "de Braose". Rhion 18:42, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 7th Baron Abergavenny

Seventh baron?? Where does this come from? Cokayne's Complete Peerage makes this William de Braose the 11th Baron Abergavenny. But this title does not appear in any contemporary documents anyway and does not seem an appropriate way to reference this man. There seems to be no consisitent way of differentiating between the several Williams de Braose on Wikipedia. Perhaps a date should be used? How about William de Braose (died 1211)? --Doug (talk) 00:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

This is based on who was the feudal baron of Abergavenny in the line of succession (or inheritance): Baron Abergavenny, depending on who was granted the land of Abergavenny by the King of England. However, it's not 100% etched in stone, officially. More thorough researches are needed on who were the actual feudal barons of Abergavenny between the mid-11th century to late 12th century. Few may have been unofficially recognized or titled as the Baron of Abergavenny or the succession was passed onto a male heir as a hereditary right (or by right of a baron's wife). My consistent source has been following the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy website, by following the heirs of William de Braose/Briouse. Hope that help you out. Sundehul 21:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

There's no dispute that this William was Lord of Abergavenny. The question is twofold. 1) What line of succession makes him seventh baron? 2) Is this an appropriate way to distinguish between the several Williams de Braose?

The FMG site doesn't use this title. Who does?? I think we should find a better way of distinguishing these men. --Doug (talk) 22:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Like I posted yesterday, more thorough researches on who were these men regarded as the actual feudal barons of Abergavenny, whether in an official or unofficial capacity. I think few of these men may have been either usurpers or possibly confusing with another feudal barony of nearby lands or the name in itself. Yes, FMG don't use numbered titles, they just followed and published what were written from the original documents and posted them online, without the modern numbering of these royal and noble peerages for record-keeping and historic research purposes. Also bear in mind that some of these feudal barons have same name, as it is medieval customary to name sons after fathers (or grandfathers in some cases). If we exclude the numbering and title of these men as feudal barons, we would end up debating and discussing too much about which guy was a feudal baron of this land at that time, which family branch he or she is from and so forth.

You're right we need to figure out a way to distinguish these men and add the right number/title to each one. It would, however, depend on how much sources and informations we can gleam from on each one of the feudal barons. The question is... do you know more or less about this man or that man that I don't know yet? Sundehul 01:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, I do know more than most people about these men. I have made a serious study of just this family for a little over ten years and there's not much written about any of them in the last 900 years that I haven't read! There are no difficulties on identifying who is who and the descent of the lordship of Abergavenny is well known. The problem is just deciding what to call each man. My problem with this set of Wikipedia articles is that someone, at some time, decided to give them these nth Baron Abergavenny titles and I can't find any good reason how they came up with that choice. The Complete Peerage gives a detailed account of the barons of Abergavenny and is just about the most authoritative source for questions of this type. By their reckoning this William is the 11th baron. My main criticism is that the title used, even if it was corrected to 11th baron, does not help a searcher to get easily to the right William de Braose, whereas William de Braose (died 1211) is specific and identifiable. --Doug (talk) 22:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you try checking out Burke's Peerage for the comparison? I never have seen or read that book nor the Complete Peerage, at least not yet. Whoever came up with the Baron Abergavenny titles on these men probably just followed whatever sources they'd gotten from and assumed the titling of these men based on that sources and the time-line of the successions. Maybe he or she just grasped at straws and hope for whoever out there, perhaps you, may have better informations or sources than he/she'd assumed. It's called improvisation. Good luck on the further researches on de Braose lineage. They're my ancestors. ;) Sundehul 23:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)