This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
I have deleted the following from the article. I can't see what sourcing is available for this and it is a surprising claim.
==Current Status==
The title of Baron of Kendal still exists and is used in the form of an [[English feudal barony]] and is an [[incorporeal hereditament]] under British [[Common Law]]. The current title holder is an American academic and researcher who has remained anonymous. While the title is in use in the form of [[hereditary property]] as the style and title of [[Baron]]/[[Baroness]], it is not granted by [[the Crown]] and is transferred via [[deed]] and private treaty. <ref>{{citation |last1=Bromley|last2=Davenport |url=https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/browse/r/h/bbad8487-e60c-4789-8e48-c2ab5f1f1a8a |title=Clowes Deeds |year=2014 |url-status=live |accessdate=9 July 2022}}</ref>
@Andrew Lancaster It was a rookie attempt to add to the subject I am studying for graduate school. I will circle back, cut my teeth as a contributor and learn how to cite to the point of origin before attempting in the future. I respect your contributions on these topics and will provide better attribution in my future edits. 2601:1C1:8580:1180:4DC1:499F:CD50:4667 (talk) 03:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia! My reason for posting it here is that I suspected that there is something behind it, but I could not work it out. I am certainly not an expert in the modern laws about English titles but I don't think the modern ones are still called "feudal"? In any case it seems confusing to use that term for something "incorporeal" and so it would need some explanation for our readers (and editors). The situation you are describing sounds more like some cases you hear about in Scotland, but in that case there is still a link to bits of land from the old lordship as I understand it. In modern England the terms baron and baroness have often been associated with the hereditary parliamentary lords. In other words your remark implies that there is a "Lord Kendal". But I've never heard of one, and when I google those words I only see characters in romance novels. There is also the question of whether any such modern title is really one which "descends" in some way from the old barony of Kendal. (That is the implication of the words "The title ... still exists".)--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:24, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From what I can see in Complete Peerage (2nd ed.) titles involving Kendal include the following, and perhaps this helps to develop some kind of legacy section for the article, which I suggest would be near the end:
John of Lancaster, Duke of Bedford, brother of Henry V, was also made "Earl of Kendal" (vol.7, p.108). This same title was re-created for his cousin John Beaufort, 1st Earl of Somerset. It was then once again re-created for the Gascon noble John de Foix, 1st Earl of Kendal (pp.108-110), whose family our article claims continued you to use the title after the French conquered Gascony. But it was clearly no longer a meaningful title.
William Parr, 1st Marquess of Northampton was also referred to as if he were Baron of Kendal, and his family really had a connection to the old barony. CP thinks this is a mistake people made, but in any case he lost his titles in 1553. (p.110)
Prince Rupert of the Rhine (d. 1682) was referred to as a Baron of Kendal. CP thinks this is another mistake. (He was a Duke of Cumberland though.) In any case this title also became extinct when he died in 1682. (p.111)
Prince George of Denmark was made Earl of Kendal, but this one also went extinct when he died in 1708. (p.111)
Melusine von der Schulenburg, Duchess of Kendal was a mistress of King George I. For her there was yet another Dukedom of Kendal created, and once again this went extinct when she died in 1743. (p.111)
In 1784 there was another Baron Kendal, James Lowther, 1st Earl of Lonsdale. However CP asserts that his baronial titles went extinct when he died in 1807. (vol.8, pp. 133-135)
I think the various dukedoms and earldoms have little to do with baronies of the original feudal type, and this article is about baronies. William Parr and James Lowther are apparently the most relevant.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
