Talk:Framlingham Castle

Expansion...

I've given the article a proper scrub and general expansion. It will probably need copy-editing I suspect. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:50, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

The 1165 fine

What do the sources say about the fine of £666? A. F. Wareham, who wrote the ODNB article, says

Earl Hugh was charged £1000 by Henry II in 1165, presumably for licence to build at Bungay: 500 marks were paid in the first year, followed by smaller instalments for the next third over the following two years. In 1168–9, however, the barons of the exchequer ordered that he was not to be summoned for the remaining 500 marks unless the king demanded it, effectively exempting Bigod from further payment.

In "The Motives and Politics of the Bigod Family" in Anglo-Norman Studies XVII the same author states:

Between 1165 and 1168 the Crown spent £1,000 on the construction of Orford castle, and in the same three years the Earl [Hugh Bigod] paid £666 to the Exchequer as part of a fine which had been levied in 1165 [the article sadly gives no more details on the reason for the fine]. In 1168 work on Orford was curtailed and in the same year Bigod was freed from paying the remaining £334.

I'm not completely sold on Bigod paying £1,000 for the right to build a castle so was wondering what the other sources say. Nev1 (talk) 02:08, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

I think the alleged licence to build at Bungay is getting confused with the £666 fine. Carpenter, Pettifers and others seem to agree on £666 being paid as a fine to protect Bungay and Framlingham, which could be, I suspect, the first two lots of the 500 mark instalments mentioned in the first quote (500 marks being £333). But I haven't seen a licence to build at Bungay mentioned in the same context, and I'd agree that a £1000 would seem steep for the right to one castle in this period. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Framlingham Castle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110901223916/http://www.measuringworth.com/index.php to http://www.measuringworth.com/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:48, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Castle on the Hill (Ed Sheeran song)

@Hchc2009: Hi, I saw you reverted my edit explaining that the song is mentioned in Ed Sheeran's 2017 single Castle on the Hill and seen in the music video. I understand that this may not have been relevant to the history of the castle, however if it was entered under a 'In popular culture' or 'Use in popular culture' section, would this be acceptable? I understand if you believe it has no place in this article. Thank you ThomDevexx ॐ (talk) 07:55, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

To be honest, I think it is highly relevant to the article on the Castle on the Hill song (it gives context to what Sheeran is singing about), but I don't think it tells us much about the castle itself (it hasn't affected public perceptions of the castle); I'd be voting against inclusion in this article on that basis, but to keep it as an "see also" link. Hchc2009 (talk) 19:03, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Pembroke College

I am conflicted (as Bursar of Pembroke) but the information concerning ownership is incorrect. English Heritage is responsible for Framlingham Castle under the terms of a deed of Guardianship signed 19/12/1913 , but the College retains ownership. The Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England is responsible for the management of the land on behalf of the Secretary of State under Section 34 of the National Heritage Act 1983 and the English Heritage Trust is responsible for the management of the building for the Commission. I am happy providing documents to support this in whatever format you like; and have a recent letter from English Heritage confirming their understanding of this (which is more readable than the deed of Guardianship) but I cannot put them online for copyright reasons. --BozMo talk 07:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Ha ha, well you would say that would't you ;-? The references given for the statement that it was given in 1913 appear reasonable: http://services.english-heritage.org.uk/researchreportspdfs/106_2007web.pdf does say it directly on page 50. And of course, following longstanding policy, wiki does prefer secondary sources to originals... William M. Connolley (talk) 08:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I had not found the source online. Of course, I can get English Heritage to publish an erratum on the document you refer to. Perhaps that is the best thing to do; although the letter from English Heritage is also secondary (whereas the 1913 deed is primary). --BozMo talk 08:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

The Land Registry is a paid Portal so I cannot use that one...Presumably our website would rank equally or above the English Heritage one as a reliable source.. --BozMo talk 08:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

English Heritage have agreed to change the inaccurate document and upload a new version; I will come back when they have. --BozMo talk 09:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

You could also cause the Sir Robert Hitcham section of www.pem.cam.ac.uk/alumni-development/impact/since-foundation/ to be updated. Possibly the website should get a page listing "Castles we own" :-) William M. Connolley (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I have updated that to include the comment that we still own Framlingham Castle. --BozMo talk 11:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with this BozMol! Hchc2009 (talk) 18:39, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

the updated recent version of the English Heritage report, which is the one given by their report index, http://research.historicengland.org.uk/Report.aspx?i=14617&ru=%2fResults.aspx%3fp%3d1%26n%3d10%26t%3dframlingham%26ns%3d1 correctly refers to English Heritage being given guardianship, not ownership of the site by Pembroke. Is this good enough to correct the article yet?

--BozMo talk 14:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Should be. You have to watch these guys, as bad as medieval monasteries with their fake charters! Johnbod (talk) 15:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Have implemented it. Still suspect a clever scam by the scholars of Pembroke though... Just can't work out what their next move will be... ;) Hchc2009 (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks both. And I won't take it personally... ;) --BozMo talk 10:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Framlingham Castle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110901223916/http://www.measuringworth.com/index.php to http://www.measuringworth.com/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)