Talk:Francis Stewart, 1st Earl of Bothwell

Biography: Military / Peerage and Baronetage

	Biography portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This redirect is supported by the military biography work group.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.

Untitled[edit]

The two articles definitely should be merged. And, for ease of reference, I would suggest that "Francis Stewart, 5th Earl Bothwell" is the most accurate description. Technically, the 1577 belting of him as earl may have been a new creation, but his subsequent adoption of the Hepburn family crest within his own coat of arms and his own view of his continuity from his uncle (not to mention the sheer simplicity of refering to the last of the Earls Bothwell as 5th rather than 1st) would make this way of referencing seem preferable [sandmonster]

My information indicates that he was actually Francis Stewart, 1st Earl of Bothwell (second creation).

The earldom seems to have been forfeited in 1567, and recreated for Francis. Mackensen 01:58, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yes and no. James VI's regent the Earl of Moray had declared the 4th Earl's titles forfeit, but neither Mary Queen of Scots nor the 4th Earl himself acknowledged it. When the Earl died, Mary arranged that the Earldom would pass on to his nephew when he reached the age of majority 9 years later.

Sir James Balfour Paul (Lord Lyon King of Arms) and other scholars are clear on this individual as are the Acts of Parliament. He was definitely forfeited. Also, his surname was Stewart, not Hepburn. So the heading of this article needs to be corrected. David Lauder 17:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd forgotten all about that! The page is (hopefully) in the proper location. Mackensen (talk) 17:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]