Talk:Thomas FitzStephen

Untitled

Thomas FitzStephen's father's name is properly rendered "Airard (Aered) FitzStephen." Malbuff (talk) 17:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

First you cannot break a source citation by adding or changing information attributed to it. That's the reason I reverted it. The cited source stated he was the "son of Stephen FitzAirard". If other sources state otherwise, they need to be carefully evaluated and compared to this source by Elisabeth M.C, van Houts (and it’s sources). If you look at the cited article, on pp. 172-3, note 71 identifies Orderic Vitalis as the source of the father’s name. Looking that up it states:

“ Thomas, the son of Stephen, had obtained an audience of the king, and offering him a gold mark, said to him, "Stephen, the son of Airard, was my father, and during his whole life he was in your father's service as a mariner. He it was who conveyed your father to England in his own ship, when he crossed the sea to make war on Harold. He was employed by your father in services of this description as long as he lived, and gave him such satisfaction that he honoured him with liberal rewards, so that he lived in great credit and prosperity among those of his own class. My lord king, I ask you to employ me in the same service, having a vessel, called the Blanche-Nef, which is fitted out in the best manner, and perfectly adapted to receive a royal retinue. ”

Orderic, ed. Forester, vol. vi, 33.

I used the Van Houts article instead of Orderic for the simple reason that many still think it an original source, even though it’s a translation, so to forgo any argument over the point I used the Ship List article. What sources did you have showing Thomas was the son of Airard? If you’d cite them exactly I’d be willing to look them up. In turn please take the time to review the Van Houts article and the Orderic quote. If you still think there’s an issue here I’ll work with you to help resolve this. Bearpatch (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)