Talk:Earl of Lincoln

Untitled

Is it appropriate to describe a place in Australia as the "family seat" of an English earl? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the Earls of Lincoln no longer have a traditional family seat, but that the earl lives in that place in Australia? john k 20:57, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think making such a distinction is appropriate. Mackensen (talk) 22:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know what the traditional family seat of the Earls of Lincoln and Dukes of Newcastle was? john k 04:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clumber Park? Choess 05:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the Earl had a son, would he have no courtesy title (such as Lord Fiennes-Clinton)? (As an aside, I noticed there is already a Baron Clinton and a Baron Clinton-Davis) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.154.177.201 (talk) 12:54, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Earls of Lincoln, Ninth Creation (1572)

Please note this is linked to John Winthrop . Aatomic1 17:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two at a time?

"It was created for a second time by King Stephen sometime between 1143 and 1155 for William de Roumare. However, on his death in 1155 the title reverted to the crown. Stephen again created the title in 1147 for Gilbert de Gant, but on his death in 1156 it reverted to the crown" Is this correct? Between 1147 and 1155 there were two different earls of Lincoln simultaneosly? Bradomín (talk) 16:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

ODNB[1] say John de Lacy was "created an earl". CP[2] says John de Lacy was the first earl of the fourth creation. Thus making Edmund de Lacy second earl, not third. DrKay (talk) 19:57, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]