Talk:Hedingham Castle

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hedingham Castle article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

East Anglia C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia 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.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Fortifications / Technology / British / European / Medieval

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Fortifications task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Architecture High‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

England High‑importance

	England portal 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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Hello, I am planning to add to this article by adding a present day use, gardens, and photography & filming sections so that the article covers other information people may be interested in along with the history. I hope this is OK by the regular contributors! Perspectionhickmott (talk) 13:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shakespeare authorship

Is this article biased enough against the Oxfordian authorship theory, or perhaps there's a way it could be edited to make it even more biased? Maybe someone could add some quotes about how the 17th earl possessed no redeeming qualities and his early poetry written under his initials was absolutely deplorable? Also let's add some statements about how Oxfordians are elitist snobs, and other original arguments that have never been heard before. Oooh, I thought of one: How did he write the last several plays? Did he write 'em while he was dead?? I'm sure I would have no problem finding all kinds of "sources" for these all over the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenjPHolm (talk • contribs) 00:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All right, folks, I have edited this down so that is will read from a neutral standpoint.

This is in accordance with the policy "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion". https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion

Criticisms of the Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship do belong on Wikipedia, but there is already a section for that.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Oxfordian_theory_of_Shakespeare_authorship#Case_against_Oxfordian_theory https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Oxfordian_theory_of_Shakespeare_authorship#Chronology_of_the_plays_and_Oxford's_1604_death — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenjPHolm (talk • contribs) 14:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In 1133 Aubrey de Vere

This article says "In 1133 Aubrey de Vere, a descendant (son, or, more probably, grandson) of the first Aubrey, was created Lord Great Chamberlain of England by King Stephen."

However King Stephen didn't take the throne till 1135.

Obviously there is an error here, but I don't know the correct date for Aubrey de Vere's appointment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MavrickWeirdo (talk • contribs) 03:30, 13 March 2006

Simon Daw replies:

Thanks for pointing out my error. It's been there since the page was first published a couple of years back, so collect a star point for observation ;o)

I've now corrected the mistake, which related to the name of the monarch rather than the date.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Simondaw (talk • contribs) 10:23, 25 March 2006

Removal and additions to further reading

22:48, 1 September 2011 PBS (combined further reading and external sources, One new entry with comprehensive bibliography, removed some less useful sources and added full information for the others) (undo)
22:52, 1 September 2011 user:Nev1 (→Further reading: restore further reading items deleted without a valid explanation)

The explanation was given in the edit history. I removed what was a random collection of entries: Take for example this entry "Coulson, Charles (2003) Hedingham Castle, Anglo-Norman Castles ed. R. Liddiard, Boydell Press" Have you checked the the book? The chapter does not exist for that author. (If you look in the references section you will see that I included the book because one of the chapters is now cited so there is no need to include it in the further reading section).

I left in place two specific official entries the official website and the county website which I fixed. In addition I and added a new entry that contains a comprehensive bibliography. This I noted on the page. -- PBS (talk) 23:17, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So why did you remove the RCHME work? Nev1 (talk) 23:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is listed in the comprehensive bibliography I included (why include that and not all the other things listed in the comprehensive bibliography which might be of some interest in a further reading section?). The information in the other two are useful in their own right. The first because it is directly accessible and is the county's own database and the other because it is on line and includes such things as telephone numbers for people who wish to visit the site. -- PBS (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why include the most important works related to the castle in a further reading section? Beats me. Why write an article at all. I know, how about we just replace this article with a link to another website which does this better than us. I particularly like The Gatehouse. Nev1 (talk) 23:51, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As The Gatehouse has a comprehensive bibliography I've removed the other links as they were duplicating what the website already listed. Nev1 (talk) 23:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to the Description section

Essex County Council (6787). "SMR Number:6787 Hedingham Castle". Unlocking Essex's Past website. Retrieved September 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |year= (help); External link in |publisher= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Essex County Council (25226). "SMR Number:25226 Hedingham Castle:Early C12 castle keep". Unlocking Essex's Past website. Retrieved September 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |year= (help); External link in |publisher= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help)CS1 maint: year (link)

From the history of the article:

03:06, 21 November 2011‎ Dearagon‎ m . . (9,985 bytes) (+95)‎ . . (→‎Description: minor grammatical and date corrections,)

The edit added information around the date 1186, but neither of the source (at the end of the paragraph and listed above) mentions that date so where does the information come from?

Source 1 says "The keep was built c.1130-40" sources 2 "Castle Keep circa 1130-1140". The edit (21 November 2011‎) changed the Wikipedia text from "and the keep between 1130-1140" to "and the keep in the 1130s and1140s" is the inclusion of 1140s extracted from information in anther source? -- PBS (talk) 09:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well caught. I had quick look elsewhere. Goodall's "The English Castle" (2011) has the keep as being begun shortly after 1141 (pg.117); on pg.119, however, he prefers after 1138, but pg.120 has it back at after 1141. Hmm. I'd be inclined to suggest we upgrade the reference, but note that there is some uncertainty! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The keep has been discussed by many scholars. There are a number who have dated the stone building known as the keep to the 1140s, assuming it was begun and built by Aubrey de Vere, 1st earl of Oxford, on his elevation to the earldom in 1141. That is highly unlikely, given the close stylistic relationship of the "keep" at Hedingham and the keep at Rochester (begun 1127) as well as the use of ashlar stone transported from a quarry in Barnack, Northamptonshire. The unsettled conditions in eastern England from 1141-1144 make it unlikely that highly finished stone could have been transported regularly from quarries in Northamptonshire to Essex. It is therefore more likely that the building was begun by the first earl's father, Aubrey de Vere II. His acquisition of the office of master chamberlain of England in 1133 is a more likely starting point for at least the design of the building, and his son's marriage to the heiress of the county of Guines on the continent around 1136 would have given even greater impetus to the construction. The probable dates should therefore read '1130s to 1140s' because it is highly unlikely that construction was complete by Aubrey II's death in May 1141. DeAragon 07:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dearagon (talk • contribs)

Dearagon. If the changes are to remain then you must modify the inline citations to support the changes that you made as the current ones do not. -- PBS (talk) 20:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PBS. Reference provided. The problem is, no one knows the exact or even approximate dates of the construction period. On "stylistic grounds" it could date between the late 1120s to about 1160, as Dixon and Marshall point out. Renn is an Anglo-Norman castle expert, and he suggests it was begun in the 1130s and finished in the 1140s. That seems the most reasonable estimate.DeAragon 05:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dearagon (talk • contribs)

Does Renn also support 1186 date? -- PBS (talk) 08:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is more than one Colne Valley

I have changed the link to the wrong Colne Valley to avoid geographical confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodgesoc (talk • contribs) 11:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]