Talk:Edward VI of England

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility work group.

Edward VI of England is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.

This article is a former featured article removal candidate. Please see the archive to see why its featured status was upheld.

Edward VI of England is either included in the Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version (the project page is at WPCD Selection). Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL images. However, if you can improve the article, please do so!

I know of no evidence that suggests of a love interest between Edward and Jane - unless anyone comes up with some, I will revert the last change... Hackloon 03:26, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Some consideration for the 1549 rebellions? 2 Some issues to improve 3 Mary of Scotland 4 Childhood 5 Succession 6 Last Words 7 Revert

[edit] Some consideration for the 1549 rebellions?

There is no mention of the 1549 rebeelions as contributing to Somerset's failure. Although I'm sure there is a separate page for Somerset exclusively, I feel that the rebellions were such a significant factor that they are surely worth a mention? They gave Somerset a reputation as being almost an anarchist for supporting the commons over the ruling elite, in supporting an anti-enclosure policy. Such a mention might also be useful for those who know little about this period, as it will provide a link and reference to an incredibly interesting period of mid-Tudor history.

For a feature article it's really rather incomplete. The rebellions during his period were pretty significant, but it looks like they barely get a mention. Maybe a link could be given or something.--T. Anthony 14:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

---

The article states that he was never Prince of Wales, but I've found a highly reputale source that suggests otherwise. The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography is featuring his mother's bio today (October 24th, 2005), and it states that "On 18 October Edward was proclaimed prince of Wales, duke of Cornwall, and earl of Carnarvon." You can read the article here http://www.oxforddnb.com/public/lotw/1.html, though if you're reading this after October 24th you'll need to page back a bit to do so.

I'll grant that I may be missing some formal ritual that Edward never went through, so I have not changed the main article. But as written it seems to me the Oxford University article is trying to say he was the Prince of Wales. Can anyone explain the discrepancy? Paul Drye

---

mollycoddled?? I have never ever come across this phrase before, could someone please help me with this

[edit] Some issues to improve

It seems to me that this article, while good, isn't quite up to what we currently expect of featured articles.

• The article is short. There are plenty of extant sources on this period and I would expect a more detailed article.
• Even while lacking in information the writing seems confusing and repetitive. For example, Edward's death causes are referred to several times in different ways but never explored in any depth.
• There are several surviving artworks depicting Edward, there's no need to limit the article to one and use it twice.
• A map or two might be helpful to give the reader some idea of the campaigns in Scotland and Cornwall during Edward's reign.
• The article has no in-line citations or footnotes of any kind.
• More solid references would be helpful. The three currently listed references are:
  1. Britannica 1911
  2. A very brief biography on a history website
  3. A tripod page which is no longer online

I hope some or all of these issues can be addressed :) Haukur 19:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, there seem to be issues with the last two paragraphs of the Early Life section. It goes from childhood illness, to education and siblings, back to illness. This may need to be cleaned up. 70.65.139.137 04:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I am also bothered by the fact that, earlier on in the article, it describes Edward's death as though it were definitely caused by tuberculosis, whereas in the section discussing Mary, it lists several possible causes of his death. It seems a bit unsure to me. --Charlotte M 12:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mary of Scotland

I've made some small amendments here. The way it was written implied that James V was still king in 1548, when in fact he died in 1542. Mary was queen in her own right. Moreover, she was a tender 5 years old in 1548, and thus only betrothed to Francis. They were married in April 1558. Rcpaterson 01:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Childhood

For no particularly good reason, I've been reading the 500+ page first volume of W.K Jordan's two volume set, Edward VI: The Young King. (George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1968)

It discusses Edward's formal education beginning at age 4, not 6. (p. 40)

From the age of 1 to 4 the Chamberlain of the house (Edward's own by Henry's decree) was Sir William Sidney and Sir John Cornwallis. Describing some "Mother Jack" as his nursemaid is misleading at best. Lady Bryan was the Lady Mistress, the "all-important" position. (ibid. Page 38)

I believe it is Richard Cox, who gets a full page of description in Jordan, and not Leonard Cox, as a tutor.

There's no mention of what seems to be the most important facet of the choice of tutors. Henry picked them because he saw a Protestant future for England, and it was starting by appointing moderate humanists/Protestants as Edward's teachers. Other tutors followed the same general mold, including a Calvinist teacher of French (Belmain), some musical tutors, and maybe Sir Anthony Cooke.

Jordan writes "We know a great deal regarding the education which this brilliant group of teachers gave to a willing and highly competent student. In a quite full sense it was the curriculum which Erasmus and Vives had so eloquently recommended[.]" In other words, although the teachers were familiar with "the Protestant Reformation that had swept through the Netherlands and Germany" it wasn't likely to be directly on the syllabus.

By the way, he started with Cato and Aesop, and quickly added Solomon's proverbs in Latin (ibid. 43)

And if you think that was rough, I have quite a few changes I'd like to see to the whole sense of the religious change afoot, but that for another time.

So, should I feel free to make my changes to a "Best Of" article? I would think so. JoshNarins 21:52, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

You ought to make changes as necessary. But a two volume biography of a kid who died at age 16? That seems a bit overkillish. john k 22:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

So far, a couple hundred pages in, Edward is basically only in the background. It is really about the people Henry VIII left in power and how they handled this government. For example. they kept the death quiet a bit to get Edward in town, and then Somerset and Paget kept the will quiet so they could gather power around them. The last couple chapters have been about the Reformation in England. There was a massive translation effort which included more than the top half dozen Protestant thinkers in a year's time. There was publishing of Erasmus' Book of Homilies and the Book of Common Prayer. Cranmer especially played host to lots of Continental Protestants who felt pressure at home (he never got Calvin, though). JoshNarins 01:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I would be careful of Jordan - although encyclopedic in style, he frequently gets things wrong! In particular, his account of Edward's education and religious maturation are often very very odd... Hackloon 03:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Succession

That section is horrible stylistically and this article probably isn't worth of having FA status unless it is converted into prose. It's very difficult to read, even for a native English speaker, and should really be in wikisource, while a description and discussion is included here in the relevant section, perhaps with some short quotations to illuminate certain parts. See Wikipedia:Don't include copies of primary sources. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 02:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree - that should be in Wikisource, not here. --mav

[edit] Last Words

Where do these come from? I assume Strype or Foxe, but either way, I've added a note of caution... Hackloon 22:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revert

I reverted this becuase it is a link to a site which only duplicates info from the Encylopedia Britanica, and is moreover pretty dody compared to Joradan, Hoak, MacCulloch et al. Hackloon 03:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)