This article 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 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Devon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Devon 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.DevonWikipedia:WikiProject DevonTemplate:WikiProject DevonDevon articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire 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.HampshireWikipedia:WikiProject HampshireTemplate:WikiProject HampshireHampshire articles
The name of the article is Elizabeth Pierrepont, Duchess of Kingston-upon-Hull, but the text says her name was Elizabeth Chudleigh, with no mention of the Pierrepont name; was it her mother's maiden name? If not, not clear why it doesn't match Chudleigh. Perhaps Burke's Peerage should be consulted? --FeanorStar7 10:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
She was born Elizabeth Chudleigh and became Elizabeth Hervey on her secret marriage to the Hon. Augustus John Hervey, but never used the name. After she persuaded a court to accept her word that she had not married Hervey, she then married Evelyn Pierrepont, 2nd Duke of Kingston-upon-Hull, and took his surname and title. However, she was still legally married to Hervey, so when he inherited the title of Earl of Bristol in 1775 she became Countess of Bristol. She still was when she died, but it would be inappropriate to call the article "Elizabeth Hervey, Countess of Bristol", because she was never known officially by this title. Her bigamy was eventually exposed but she continued to use the title Duchess of Kingston for the rest of her life, so this is probably the best title for the article. Nevertheless, she was famous (and infamous) at Court for many years as "Miss Chudleigh" and this is how she tends to be referred to by historians - there are plenty of dukes and duchesses of this and that, but only one Elizabeth Chudleigh. --Karenjc (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If that's the case, then changing "This did not, however, prevent her from becoming the mistress of the 2nd Duke of Kingston-upon-Hull" to "This did not, however, prevent her from becoming the mistress of Evelyn Pierrepont, the 2nd Duke of Kingston-upon-Hull" would clarify how she acquired the Pierrepont name. 24.128.188.152 (talk) 05:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Which proof is there for that claim? It is well-established today that Frederick II of Prussia was not interested in women m uch, and probably less so in a random socialite from England. Indications point to Fred having been gay; or impotent after a botched operation; or both.I checked and found this edit introduced the idea, my guess is that this user had no idea what he was writing about. Being received by a king, however formally or informally, is not equal to being his mistress. --Enyavar (talk) 02:02, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No comments:
Post a Comment