Talk:Anstruther baronets

	Biography portal 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 supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.

Untitled[edit]

Something is seriously wrong with this whole entry. As far I can see either there is another 1700 baronetcy or the present one listed as extinct is extant or [1] [2] is wrong. Further more the same links don't even seems particularly agree with the actual territorial designation or at least as we have phrased it. We also need to add irrespective of the above the 'of that Ilk' as that is part of the persons name. Can someone confirm the accuracy of the above and the article so we can correctAlci12 11:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC) Interesting definition of "seriously wrong"! The material on this page is sourced from Leigh Rayment's pages - of course that is no more guaranteed to be accurate than your references. The entry in Who Was Who for Ralph Anstruther (1921-2002) does suggest that he succeeded his cousin, Sir Windham Eric Francis Carmichael-Anstruther to the baronetcy of Anstruther of Anstruther in 1980. To that extend Leigh Rayment's material and the article appear to be inaccurate, but this can be easily fixed. As for "of that Ilk", that simply means "of that place" - holders of the Anstruther of Anstruther baronetcy could be described as Anstruther of that Ilk, so Sir Ralph could be "of Balcaskie", "of that Ilk" or both.--George Burgess 14:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd consider saying a title is extinct when it appears it isn't is 'seriously wrong' what would you call it, an oversight :) You can be 'of X' in Scotland without a baronetcy it's a traditonal form which we ought to try to get correct. In this case they have used the form I mentioned.Alci12 18:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, not an oversight - simply use of one source which turns out to be in conflict with others. Not the first time that sources are inconsistent, and certainly not the last. I am perfectly well aware that 'of X' and 'in X' are traditional forms in Scotland, but that does not mean that their use or non-use in a particular context is necessarily incorrect.--George Burgess 19:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. [3] says that John Anstruther "acquired Balcaskie in 1698," which matches with thepeerage.com, "8th Baronet Anstruther, of Wrae, co. Linlithgow [N.S., 1694] on 19 May 2002, and from 1698, 'of Balcaskie, co. Fife' and 'of Braemore, co. Caithness.'". So the original territorial designation of the 1694 baronetcy was "of Ware, Linlithgowshire", and the other two designations were added shortly thereafter. Note that elsewhere (http://www.thepeerage.com/p8136.htm#i81353), thepeerage.com describes one of these baronets as "of Balcaskie," suggesting that was their chief seat. From the description given, it appears that the 1798 baronetcy was issued to heir-male, and hence became extinct 1980, while the 1700 baronetcy was issued to "heirs-male whatsoever," and passed to the descendants of the 1st baronet of 1694 (uncle of the 1st baronet of 1700). I'm a little curious about how he proved his claim: Philip Anstruther, grandson of the 2nd Baronet (of 1700) had a number of children, and the online data don't make it clear whether his sons John Newdegate Anstruther (b. 1850, married 1874) and Henry Lewis Anstruther (b. 1856, moved to New Zealand and/or Australia) had male issue, which would be before Sir Ralph in line if they existed. Choess 18:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can certainly change the traditional forms of territorial use. The Macdonalds of the isles changed to Macdonald of Sleat in the Mid 20C due to LL ruling that only the PoW could use 'of the Isles' in Scotland. However can you change a desination of a baronetcy? There have been warrants for Peers to use slight variable forms of their titles in use but not in legal fact but is there something similar for baronets or have they just been left to use what they wishAlci12 14:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Burgess. Also, (1) the fact that one owns Balcaskie does not make that one's territorial designation. And (2) if the owner of Balcaskie is then made a Baronet, it does not follow that the territorial designation of the baronetcy would be "of Balcaskie". Nor does the fact that the Baronet is given the territorial designation "of Balcaskie" necessarily mean one owns property in that place (though he might). In Scotland, a territorial designation can only be changed by or with consent of Lord Lyon. - Kittybrewster 22:57, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone is disputing 1 or 2. The confusion is over "8th Baronet Anstruther, of Wrae, co. Linlithgow [N.S., 1694]...and from 1698, 'of Balcaskie, co. Fife' and 'of Braemore, co. Caithness.'". On various sources thereafter the format name baronet of Balcaskie is used. If this is just a td change of name not title agreed with LL then that's fine but we want to be clear as far as possible that that is the case Alci12 09:49, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrae, Linlithgow?[edit]

The only mention on any map I have of the toponym Wrae, is in Tweeddale as in Wrae Tower. Where in Linlithgowshire do these Baronets come from? Brendandh 15:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anstruther(NS)and(GB)[edit]

Debrett's Peerage & Baronetage 2008(P.B23) describe as follows:

ANSTRUTHER (NS) 1694, of Balcaskie, (NS) 1700 of Anstruther, Fife, and (GB) 1798 of Anstruther

Captain Sir IAN FIFE CAMPBELL ANSTRUTHER, 8th Baronet of Balcaskie, 13th of Anstruther (NS, cr 1700), and 10th of Anstruther (GB, cr 1798)

SEBASTIAN PATEN CAMPBELL (heir to the NS baronetcies)

TOBIAS ALEXANDER CAMPBELL (heir to the GB baronetcy)

I introduced it. However, Debrett isn't decision information. Please show other informations to here. Xantios (talk) 21:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(N.B. It is odd that Toby Anstruther redirects to this page where there is no mention at all of him! 213.205.227.31 (talk) 11:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC))[reply]

The Daily Telegraph's obituary of Sir Ian Fife Campbell Anstruther, ends with this: "Sir Ian Anstruther's marriage to Honor Blake, with whom he had a daughter, was dissolved, and he married secondly, in 1963, Susan Walker, with whom he had two sons and three daughters. Their elder son, Sebastian, is expected to inherit the two Scottish titles; the younger son, Toby, becomes the 11th Bt of Anstruther (GB)." So I've added him to the list though that only adds to the confusion as we now have his elder brother as the 9th and him as the 11th simultaneously. I've also added Toby's birth date from http://www.zipworld.com.au/~lnbdds/home/anstruther1key.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dumbledad (talk • contribs) 15:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier baronet[edit]

See [4] for an earlier Sir Robert Anstruther, courtier and ambassador. There is also information on him at [5], but I do not have access to it. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:53, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]