Talk:Leofric (bishop)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Leofric (bishop)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 23:32, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I will review this in the next day or two. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:32, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Just about everything looks really good. I've copyedited parts of it, but just revert anything that doesn't work or you are not happy with.

• "and possibly knew Pope Leo IX before he became pope": This is slightly awkward but I can't think of a better way to phrase it. However, the main body does not really say this, merely that he was educated at a place where Leo was a canon.
• "Leofric worked to increase the endowment of his cathedral": A little jargony as the general reader may not know what an endowment is. Although the next words kind of explain it, I'm not sure it would be clear. But feel free to ignore this if you don't agree.
• "Leofric remained a close supporter and friend of Edward for the king's entire life.": Is it possible to specify some examples of how he supported him? Particularly as it says later that he kept out of the whole Edward-Godwin thing.
• "When Bishop Lyfing died in 1046, the king made Leofric Bishop of Cornwall as well as Bishop of Crediton.[16][17] The two sees united by Lyfing became the see of Exeter when in 1050 Bishop Leofric moved his episcopal seat from Crediton to Exeter." This is slightly unclear to me: were the sees united under Lyfing, or (as this seems to suggest) were they unified when Edward gave them both to Leofric?
• "The move of the see, or bishopric…": It seems a little odd to define see here when it was used without definition in the previous sentence.
• "who was proclaimed a saint after death": A slightly odd phrase which makes it ambiguous after whose death (his own, presumably).
• "The fact that he survived William's purge of the native English bishops in 1070 is evidence that he must not have been too outspoken against William." I seem to remember that the purge was not quite as all-encompassing as we are always led to believe and that rather more bishops survived than would be expected and were instead replaced through "natural wastage". However, I may be mistaken.
• Spot-checks of a couple of printed sources fine, ditto ODNB.

Everything else seems fine, and this is an easy pass once these things are cleared up. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Fixed the first two - the bit about friend well, Barlow doesn't give examples. I adore him, really I do. (not). I've reworded a bit on the Lyfing/Cornwall/Crediton/Exeter thing - Lyfing didn't really combine the two sees together - but the whole episode is kinda murky anyway. Fixed the linkagae/explanation of "see". Fixed the bit about Leo's sainthood. On the purge - I'm just following the sources here - it's clear that Leofric wasn't outspoken against William, because those that might have been got taken care of -in general, the episcopate accomadated itself to William pretty well - as did much of the nobility - at least at first. Of course, there wasn't much other choice either ... Let me know if there is something else that needs fixing, and thank you for the review. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

All good now, passing. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Date of death

The article says that Leofric died on either 10 or 11 February 1072. However, both the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and the Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Anglo-Saxon England say he died on 10 February, without even mentioning the other date. – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 15:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree that 10 February 1072 should be the only date we show. It was as such in Oliver's Lives of the Bishops of Exeter (1861), p.8. And in the essay "Leofric and his Times" published in Leofric of Exeter (1972, Exeter University), Prof. Frank Barlow discusses Leofric's date of death in an appendix, pp.15–16. He explains why the year should be accepted as 1072, but makes no comment about the date possibly being anything other than 10 February: it is apparently noted as such in the Calendar in Leofric Missal.

So I reckon that these sources and the two that you mention clearly trump the generic ​​​​​​Handbook of British Chronology, and I'd be happy with removing "or 11 February" and citing the ODNB.  —Smalljim  17:00, 12 November 2022 (UTC)