GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Seraphim System ( talk · contribs) 05:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Clearly written, concise, well-sourced. There are some details that can be added from DNB, including links to Herfast and Lanfranc, and according to DNB he did receive writs that protected the abbey's lands from forfeiture to the Norman lords, but the major aspects are covered. Will leave open for comment, but leaning towards a clear pass.
Seraphim System (
talk) 05:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
...the right to have any bishop of the abbey's choice perform episcopal functions for the abbey
once by a miraculous cure of a knight injured in the crowd
The bishop of Thetford, Herbert Losinga, protested
@ Ealdgyth: I'm not the reviewer, so I didn't do a too in depth view, but the above are just some things I noticed/had questions about while doing a once over. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
With the appointment of Lanfranc as archbishop of Canterbury in 1070, the ecclesiastical landscape changed dramatically as he wished to implement the plans of the reforming papacy, which called for sees to be located in the major towns and for abbots to be subject to diocesan control. To protect Bury from this threat Baldwin travelled to Rome in 1071 where he secured a privilege which placed his abbey under the protection of the papacy. Neither letters of criticism from Lanfranc nor the testimony of jurors from nine counties persuaded Herfast, the bishop of Thetford, to abandon his claim to Bury. According to the Liber de miraculis sancti Eadmundi, when Herfast damaged his eyes in a riding accident, Baldwin agreed to save his sight only if he agreed to give up his claim. Orders from Rome, oral memory, and oaths made under duress did not, however, resolve the dispute, and at Easter 1081 the rival parties assembled in front of the king and the royal council in London. Baldwin defeated his opponent by producing four spurious charters in which English kings forbade the bishop of East Anglia from interfering with Bury Abbey in any way. Subsequent attempts to move the see to Bury were easily disposed of, as Baldwin not only kept the writ which enforced this decision but also had the foresight to forge a diploma in which William I expressly forbade Herfast and his successors from seeking to revive their claim to Bury. Baldwin's actions ensured that Bury was not chosen as the new ecclesiastical capital of East Anglia, and the documents which he collated guaranteed the monastery's independence until the dissolution.
So from DNB the emphasis is not on the episcopal functions, but the independence of the monastary in general, if I've understood it correctly — I did read these as being the same thing, but perhaps it could be stated more explicitly Seraphim System ( talk) 03:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Ealdgyth A few questions:
Upon reviewing additional sources that are available, I think this article does not sufficiently cover the major aspects. While we don't require that GA articles be complete or include every detail, the current article is missing quite a lot particular in its treatment of the power struggles over the abby, about which much has been written, and the treatment in this article is somewhat hurried. There are also a number of sources that discuss why Baldwin may have enjoyed such royal favor. Seraphim System ( talk) 22:34, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Seraphim System ( talk · contribs) 05:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Clearly written, concise, well-sourced. There are some details that can be added from DNB, including links to Herfast and Lanfranc, and according to DNB he did receive writs that protected the abbey's lands from forfeiture to the Norman lords, but the major aspects are covered. Will leave open for comment, but leaning towards a clear pass.
Seraphim System (
talk) 05:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
...the right to have any bishop of the abbey's choice perform episcopal functions for the abbey
once by a miraculous cure of a knight injured in the crowd
The bishop of Thetford, Herbert Losinga, protested
@ Ealdgyth: I'm not the reviewer, so I didn't do a too in depth view, but the above are just some things I noticed/had questions about while doing a once over. TonyBallioni ( talk) 00:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
With the appointment of Lanfranc as archbishop of Canterbury in 1070, the ecclesiastical landscape changed dramatically as he wished to implement the plans of the reforming papacy, which called for sees to be located in the major towns and for abbots to be subject to diocesan control. To protect Bury from this threat Baldwin travelled to Rome in 1071 where he secured a privilege which placed his abbey under the protection of the papacy. Neither letters of criticism from Lanfranc nor the testimony of jurors from nine counties persuaded Herfast, the bishop of Thetford, to abandon his claim to Bury. According to the Liber de miraculis sancti Eadmundi, when Herfast damaged his eyes in a riding accident, Baldwin agreed to save his sight only if he agreed to give up his claim. Orders from Rome, oral memory, and oaths made under duress did not, however, resolve the dispute, and at Easter 1081 the rival parties assembled in front of the king and the royal council in London. Baldwin defeated his opponent by producing four spurious charters in which English kings forbade the bishop of East Anglia from interfering with Bury Abbey in any way. Subsequent attempts to move the see to Bury were easily disposed of, as Baldwin not only kept the writ which enforced this decision but also had the foresight to forge a diploma in which William I expressly forbade Herfast and his successors from seeking to revive their claim to Bury. Baldwin's actions ensured that Bury was not chosen as the new ecclesiastical capital of East Anglia, and the documents which he collated guaranteed the monastery's independence until the dissolution.
So from DNB the emphasis is not on the episcopal functions, but the independence of the monastary in general, if I've understood it correctly — I did read these as being the same thing, but perhaps it could be stated more explicitly Seraphim System ( talk) 03:38, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Ealdgyth A few questions:
Upon reviewing additional sources that are available, I think this article does not sufficiently cover the major aspects. While we don't require that GA articles be complete or include every detail, the current article is missing quite a lot particular in its treatment of the power struggles over the abby, about which much has been written, and the treatment in this article is somewhat hurried. There are also a number of sources that discuss why Baldwin may have enjoyed such royal favor. Seraphim System ( talk) 22:34, 26 June 2017 (UTC)