Talk:George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore
|George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.|
|This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 25, 2017.|
|Current status: Featured article|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
"George Calvert was born at Kiplin in late 1579 (birth month and day yet to be researched). His mother Alicia/Alice died on 28 November 1587, when he was fifteen years old." Eight year gap, 15 years old. Which of these numbers is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
my name is phil how are you? I'm assuming it was Dublin. Can someone please advise?
"However, in 1625 Calvert was created Baron Baltimore, of Baltimore in the County of Longford, as a reward for his loyalty to the King and moved to his Irish estates." I'm a little dubious of this line. Despite the fact that there are a few different places saying this, I can find no other reference of a city called Baltimore in Co. Longford. There is however, a city called Baltimore in Co. Cork.
-> Okay seriously, someone needs to look this up. The city of Longford is in Cork, not Longford. This article seems wrong.
- I have found a reference which suggests that Calvert's title refers to the Baltimore in Cork County (rather than Longford). It is on page 242 of Old Virginia and Her Neighbours by John Fiske (1900). In the section titled "The Irish Baltimore" it says: "On the southwestern coast of Ireland, not far from Cape Clear, the steamship on its way from New York to Liverpool passes within sight of a small promontory crowned by an ancient village bearing the Gaelic name of Baltimore, which signifies "large townlands". The events which transferred this Irish name to the banks Patapsco River make an interesting chapter of history." There is also a map with Baltimore marked on it and it seems to be the Baltimore in Irish County Cork. Is it possible that Calvert had an estate in County Longford, but his title was derived from a place in County Cork? I am puzzled. Qblik 16:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Fiske was mistaken, and that has been noted by other historians. The present reference is to Brugger, but I could add references from Codignola and Krugler, in my opinion the two best and most up-to-date sources on the subject. No, there isn't a city called Baltimore in Longford: it was merely the name of the manor. "Baltimore, County Longford", is documented as the estate and barony that Calvert was granted by the king in 1625. I think the place is long gone now. qp10qp 22:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- If you have some good references that Fiske is wrong then perhaps you could incorporate them into footnote 35 (if not into the main text). So far the quote from Krugler says "Baltimore in Ireland", which in itself is ambiguous, if not confusing (given that Baltimore in Cork seems to be the Baltimore in Ireland right now, if the one in Longford is long gone). Qblik 05:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- The reference was given to Brugger at first mention. The method of noting in the article is to add snippets of information and quotes of interest, but much of the information is just referenced by page numbers without necessarily quoting the sources. I don't think "Baltimore, in Ireland" is ambiguous, since the reader has already been told that this was Baltimore, County Longford, which is backed up by the reference to Brugger, page 4.
- There's no need to add information to the article that a historian was wrong about where Baltimore, Ireland, was, if his mistake is not included anywhere in the text. I promise that we looked into such matters carefully as part of the Featured Article candidacy (historians often make mistakes and it is up to us to spot that by comparing sources). Here are quotes for the refs used, plus some extra ones to show that they were representative:
- "...two years later James granted Calvert twenty-three hundred acres in County Longford, Ireland, where his home was known as the Manor of Baltimore." Brugger, Robert J. (1988). Maryland: A Middle Temperament, 1634-1980, p 4.
- "On 16/26 February, in recompense for past services, James I appointed Calvert Baron Baltimore of Baltimore, in County Longford, Ireland." Codignola, Luca (1988). The Coldest Harbour of the Land: Simon Stock and Lord Baltimore’s Colony in Newfoundland, 1621-1649, p 12.
- "The condition of his Irish estates in the county of Longford concerned him." Krugler, John D. (2004). English and Catholic: the Lords Baltimore in the Seventeenth Century, p 86.
- "Fiske, Old Virginia and Her Neighbours, vol I, page 255, appears to be in error in identifying Baltimore in County Cork with the place which gave Sir George Calvert his title." Smith, Charles Ernest (1899). Religion Under the Barons of Baltimore, p 32.
- "After his resignation, he sold his office to Sir Albert Morton for £6,000, and obtained the title of Baron of Baltimore, in County Longford, Ireland." Laurence Urdang (1976). Lives of the Stuart Age, 1603-1714, p 51.
- "It is not known when George Calvert became a Roman Catholic, but it was public knowledge in London by the winter 1624-5 when he resigned his office and was raised to the Irish peerage as Baron Baltimore in County Longford." Hennesey, James J (1981). American Catholics: A History of the Roman Catholic Community in the United States, p 38.
- "Letters from Naples mention the death of the Right Hon. Frederic Calvert, Baron of Baltimore, of Baltimore, in the county of Longford, in Ireland, Lord Proprietor and Governor of Maryland." Edmund Burke (ed.). Annual register for year 1771, p 150.
qp10qp 00:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
George Henry Calvert merge issue
The presence of the article "George Henry Calvert" is superfluous since it is about the same guy as the article "George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore". It needs to be merged or deleted—I hope quickly, because "George Calvert, 1st Baron Baltimore" is a current featured-article candidate. "George Henry Calvert" is superfluous because it contains almost nothing that is not covered in the other article and what few differences it has are unreferenced and so can't be blindly added to its fully referenced fellow. The differences are worth looking up, though, which I will do. I am happy to carry out the merge if no-one objects. qp10qp 01:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Good Article review
- Well-written: Pass
- Factually accurate: Pass
- Broad: Pass
- Neutrally written: Pass
- Stable: Pass
- Well-referenced: Pass
- Images: Pass
This article continues to meet the Good Article criteria. I have already passed it once. For some reason it was renominated. --Bookworm857158367 15:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Information removed for the moment
I have added a considerable amount of information, largely from Codignola and Krugler, which either corroborates or extends the existing material referenced to Browne and Fiske, books I do not have access to. By and large, there's no contradiction: the only factual material I have removed is contained in the following, where I felt the motivations were unclear and the information contradictory (which isn't to say that all of it is necessarily wrong, just that I can't verify it from other sources):
- Stourton went to the Privy Council to complain about Baltimore, though the Council dismissed the charges. Soon after, he was deprived of his second wife's company as she fled south to Virginia. Further, the winter of 1628-1629 was a disaster, and like many early settlers the residents of Avalon suffered terribly from cold and malnutrition.
- Spurned by Virginia, Baltimore returned to England, unaccountably leaving his wife and children in Jamestown to follow him later.
Now, Stourton sailed for England in 1628, which would mean that Baltimore's wife "fled south" that year, not long after arriving at Ferryland. But why "fled"? And did she leave the children with Baltimore or not? It doesn't quite add up for me. I tend to believe with Luca Codignola that she stayed the winter with Baltimore and the children and travelled down to Virginia with him in 1629 ("When Baltimore sailed south to Virginia he had with him his wife and about forty settlers." Codignola, p 54). Though the article said that Baltimore left his wife and children in Jamestown, Codignola says (p.53) that in August 1629 Baltimore sent his sons and daughters back to England, his wife alone staying with him. It sounds to me therefore as if he sent the children back from Newfoundland before sailing down to Virginia with his wife, where he arrived in late September or early October. We know that Baltimore's wife was drowned in early 1630 on the way home but also that Baltimore's children were still alive (Leonard went on to become governor of Maryland), and so they could not have been in the ship with Joane when it foundered.
I cannot rule out that Baltimore's wife did sail to Virginia before him, though I don't understand the circumstances implied by the word "fled". If someone who has Browne can provide the explanation for that, then the information would be a welcome and intriguing addition to the article. The Dictionary of Canadian Biography, which is listed in "External Links", says: "Without waiting for a reply to this appeal, he left for Virginia, whither his wife had preceded him in the fall of 1628." (Dictionary of Canadian Biography Online). But I am not inclined to cite that page as a reliable source, as it contains some obvious errors. I have left the word "unaccountably" in, which I presume is Browne's, because I have seen no account of why Baltimore left his wife in Virginia. I can guess a reason, though: Baltimore needed to get back to England in a hurry, after being booted out of Virginia, and maybe there wasn't enough room on the boat for all his servants and possessions, so perhaps he left his wife behind in charge of them. Just my speculation. qp10qp 06:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
A contradiction retained
The only other potential contradiction between Browne/Fiske and other sources is that Browne and/or Fiske apparently say that Charles maintained Baltimore as a privy councillor. I have left that in, with the references to Browne and Fiske, but added notes to this effect:
- "But Codignola says, "The king’s promise to keep him on as a member of the Privy Council was not to be maintained by his successor, Charles I, to whom Lord Baltimore refused to swear loyalty". Codignola, Page 12; Krugler says he left the Privy Council in March. Krugler, Page 5."
And I have added (later in the text, so as not to make the contradiction look too startling) that Calvert had to resign his Privy Council seat because he refused to take the oath of allegiance. The reason I think these apparent contradictions can cohabit in the text is that a chink of logic exists which reconciles the two—viz: since Charles did not remove Baltimore from the Privy Council, Baltimore technically removed himself by resigning the seat after refusing to take the oath. qp10qp 06:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Proceding in that manner is not feasible. The contradiction was glossed over without even noting it. Sentences with "technically" seldom make sense and so it is here too. You cannot resolve the contradiction this way. Also, by moving all mentioning that he departed from the Council into the footnote while retaining his remaining in it in the main text, the article gave a totally false impression. Str1977 (talk) 07:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
More about the merge
I propose to undertake the merge of this article and George Henry Calvert in two or three days (five from the posting of the merge template, as courtesy requires). I have added one or two little nuances from the latter, such as Anne Mynne's alternative name of "Mayne", but otherwise intend to lose the majority of the GHC article on grounds of adding nothing extra or inaccuracy. The only substantial differences or interesting extras, as far as I can see, are contained in the following:
"Afterwards he was sent by the king to Ireland to report on the success of the policy of bringing the Irish people into conformity with the Church of England. There was a great deal of discontent among the Irish, and several commissions were appointed to hear and report on the grievances. Calvert served on two of these commissions."
- The present article only mentions one commission. I can't find a suitable reference to Calvert serving on two, and so I have left it out. If someone wants to reference and add it (Google suggests the information might be in Browne), go ahead.
"As a reward for faithful service the king granted him (in 1621) a manor of 2300 acres, in the county of Longford, Ireland, on the condition that all settlers "should be conformable in point of religion." Calvert, becoming a Catholic, in 1624, surrendered this manor, but received it again, with the religious clause omitted."
- Once again, these details are probably in Browne, but I'd rather steer clear of this, as the dates seem shaky to me (Calvert didn't declare himself publicly Catholic till 1625). The present article mentions the grant of Irish lands, anyway.
"After the death of James, Charles offered to dispense with the oath of religious supremacy, if Calvert would remain in the council, but Calvert declined."
- That's interesting. But I can't find a source for it, and other sources contradict it. I think the matter is covered well and complicatedly enough, but others may wish to look into this.
"Baltimore's works are "Carmen Funebre in D. Hen. Untonum." in a collection of verses on Sir Henry Unton's death, 1596; "The Answer to Tom Tell-troth: The Practice of Princes and the Lamentations of the Kirk," (1642), a justification of the policy of King James in refusing to support the claim of the Elector Palatine to the crown of Bohemia."
- I didn't think mentioning these obscure works from the days of rent-a-tract would do much for the reader of the article, but here they are if anyone wants to add them (though with a reference).
qp10qp 07:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Since it is five days since the merger was proposed and nobody has objected, I have now carried out the merge. qp10qp 16:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
"A decade before George was born, Sir Thomas Gargrave had described Richmondshire as a territory where all gentlemen were "evil in religion", by which he meant Roman Catholic; it appears Leonard Calvert was no exception. During the reign of Elizabeth I, the royal government over the church and of compulsory religious uniformity were enacted by parliament and enforced through penal laws. The Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity of 1559 included an oath of allegiance to the queen and an implicit denial of the Pope's authority over the church."
- This would be less weasel-like if there were links to the 1569 Northern Rebellion that took place on their doorstep in Yorkshire, and to Regnans in Excelsis of 1570. All other European kingdoms had oaths of allegiance and almost all of the Catholic kings controlled the Papacy's powers in their domains.22.214.171.124 (talk) 05:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Centered sketch of Calvert
Centered images may be larger (up to 400px) when they are alone.
This image, which is an original sketch of Calvert, is thought to capture his personality the best.
That's why I think it's worth keeping it centered.
If someone still felt it was too big, it could go down to 350px or 300px.
But it tells the story so well about Calvert himself (showing him more personally than the formal paintings) that it really contributes something unique to the article.
just after footnote 73 in the text is the line 'As he wrote to Buckingham, "I came to builde, and sett, and sowe, but I am falne to fighting with Frenchmen [sic]".' What does sic refer to?--2607:FEA8:D5DF:FEF6:45D5:59C4:CE26:3B41 (talk) 14:28, 2 June 2019 (UTC)