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 within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Royalty. For more information, visit the project page.English RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject English RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject English RoyaltyEnglish royalty articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I believe she was not universally always known as Lady, and I believe she is recognizable without it. Therefore "Lady" shuld not be included in the article title (as the requirement for such inclusion is: person if universally recognised with it and their name is unrecognisable without it). It seems to me that recently, there has been sort of campaign by some users to put titulary into headings, without any solid support from naming conventions, and this here apparently is a part of such campaign. 217.140.193.12302:52, 19 July 2005 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
May I just point out a small error in this article? Eleanor Brandon Clifford was herself a legal heir to Henry VIII for only a very brief few months of her life. The Third Act for the Succession cited in this article, if read carefully, dealt only with the children of Henry VIII. No heirs or heiresses beyond the "issue of his body" were mentioned. Thus Eleanor Brandon Clifford is not named in the Third Act for the Succession. However, Henry VIII's will of December 1546 did finally name her as an heir after his own children, their children, future male children of Frances Brandon Grey, then Frances herself, and then Frances' daughters. Eleanor died in late September 1547. Thus she was a legal heir to Henry VIII for only ten brief months. But between March 1544 (the passage of the Act) and late December 1546, she was legally excluded from the succession. I will leave it to one of the Wiki editors to amend the text of the article accordingly. PhD Historian (talk) 22:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I noticed that the National Portrait Gallery in London online has a sketch of the portrait that people have labeled as Lady Margaret Clifford on here. If that portrait is Lady Margaret, daughter of Lady Eleanor -- she would not use the full Brandon arms on the right side of the coat of arms painted. The arms depicted are solely that of Henry Clifford's ancestry and that of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk. Here is the link to the NPG page which identifies the portrait/sketch as Lady Eleanor, not her daughter Margaret. Men and women are always entitled to display the arms of their paternal line but are not usually entitled to display by way of quartering the arms of families from whom there is descent only through a female line (for example, the arms of a mother or grandmother or great-grandmother). -- National Portrait Gallery -- Lady Meg (talk) 09:20, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply