# Talk:Richard Basset

The proper thing to do when you are reverted is to take the discussion to the talk page, not to revert again. I removed all the references to the 1823 reference because they were unneeded and the work is old and not up to scholarly standards of this day. There is no need for references in the lead paragraph when the article text already supports the information in the lead. Per WP:CITEVAR, when an article already has an established citation style, you should not add citations in a different style or change the style. This is a Good article - the citation style was already consistent, so it's not a good idea to add citations in a totally different style. And the use of a bulleted list for the offspring is jarring. We are an encyclopedia and it's better to use prose. Only in large articles or where the list of offspring is quite extensive should lists be used. And the breaking of that also removed the citation from the sentence "Basset witnessed a royal charter in 1135 but was dead by 1144, when his lands were granted by the Empress Matilda and her son Henry to his eldest son.". Please self-revert and discuss the changes rather than reverting with out any discussion at all. Also - please use informative edit summaries to describe what you're doing when you do things - I very carefully gave explanations with each edit I made. Edit summaries are good editing practice. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:34, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikilawyering! I shall reply in detail tomorrow. Sliven2000 (talk) 18:56, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I'll admit that I'd share Ealdgyth's concerns about using an 18th-century work for 12th-century biographical history, unless there's a strong reason to believe it contains reliable detail missing in modern sources. Hchc2009 (talk) 19:25, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Me too. Johnbod (talk) 02:16, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Apologies make that tomorrow. Real life intervenes. Sliven2000 (talk) 15:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Restored original version because of the following:

Keats-Rohan does not give Matilda a surname, in this time period surnames are not necessarily inherited from the father so we can not assume that she was ever called "Matilda Ridel"
No source is given for a child named John. Neither Keats-Rohan nor Judith Green in their entries on Richard
The source given for Richard's marriage to Matilda does not mention her mother as Geva. This is a serious issue - inserting information into an already sourced statement when the source for the statement does not support the information.
Once again, we do not need to put the children into a list format - prose is fine and we are, again, per WP:NOTGENEALOGY
the source for the information about William is Keats-Rohan, who does not support the "married an unknown de stafford" information that has been inserted into already sourced information.
"Willaims linage extends the Basset's of Sapcote, Ralph Basset (died 1282)" is ungramatical and unreadable. I assume that "Willaims" is supposed to be "William's" and what does "linage extends the Basset's of Sapcote, Ralph Basset (died 1292)" (I assume "lineage" and "Bassets" were meant?) MEAN? Also lacks a period at the end.
The above mangled something is sourced to The history and antiquities of the county of Leicester which I assume is this source which was published in 1811. First, this is an utterly incomplete bibliographic entry - it lacks a publisher, publication date, author, etc. And it doesn't give a page number for a book of over a thousand pages.
"Basset witnessed a royal charter in 1135 but was dead by 1144 when his lands were granted by the Empress Matilda and her son Henry to Richard's son Geoffrey Ridel." has been disconnected from its source - Keats-Rohan. This is another serious issue - it breaks source-text integrity.
"Lord of Weldon (d 1180) married Sibil Mauduit they had issue." is unsourced in the entry for Geoffrey Ridel
There is no source for Sibil having the surname Basset. As noted above, surnames are not necessarily inherited in this period, so it cannot be assumed that she used that or any other surname.
Also for Sibil, the "son of Lord Robert de Cauz and Isabel de Ferrers they had issue." information is unsourced
Also for Matilda (the daughter) - the source given, Keats-Rohan, does not give her the surname "Basset". Again, inserting information into an already sourced statement that is not supported by the source is a serious problem.
Also for the daughter Matilda - "Son of John de Stuteville, and Agnes of Warwickshire" has been inserted into sourced information. Keats-Rohan does NOT give the parentage of John.
"Citations" and "References" are permitted headings for those sections, and "Bibliography" is actually slightly depreciated, as it should be used for works BY the subject of the article.
Please stop with your unhelpful and against policy edits. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Editing policy - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editing_policy
nstead of removing content from an article or reverting a new contribution, consider:
Rephrasing or copy-editing to improve grammar or more accurately represent the sources
Formatting or sourcing on the spot
Tagging it as necessary
Correcting inaccuracies, while keeping the rest of the content intact
Merging or moving the content to a more relevant existing article, or splitting the content to an entirely new article
Adding another point of view to the existing points of view to make the article more balanced
Requesting a citation by adding the [citation needed] tag, or adding any other appropriate cleanup tags to content you cannot fix yourself
Doing a quick search for sources and adding a citation yourself
Repairing a dead link if a new URL for the page or an archive of the old one can be located
Merging the entire article into another article with the original article turned into a redirect as described at performing a merge
Fixing errors in wikitext or formatting Pipera (talk) 17:51, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines
Discuss edits: The talk page is particularly useful to talk about edits. If one of your edits has been reverted, and you change it back again, it is good practice to leave an explanation on the talk page and a note in the edit summary that you have done so. The talk page is also the place to ask about another editor's changes. If someone questions one of your edits, make sure you reply with a full, helpful rationale.
Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page. Pipera (talk) 17:58, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Anyone editing this article do they have an actual copy of the source book, and can verify what is on each page cited here with page numbers, and associated cited sources contained in their text.
Example page XYZ states that ...... (reference author.)? Would be very interested to see this here instead of a blank claim that Keats-Rohan, K. S. B. (1999). Domesday Descendants: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents, 1066–1166: Pipe Rolls to Cartae Baronum. Ipswich, UK: Boydell Press. ISBN 0-85115-863-3. was sourced.

Dec 2024 (2) this diff has the following problems:

"High Sheriff of Warwickshire" is sourced to a "List of sheriffs for England and Wales,from the earliest times to A.D. 1831,compiled from documents in the Public Record Office by New York,Kraus Reprint Corp.; Great Britain. Public Record Office Publication date 1963 pahge 75 https://archive.org/details/listofsheriffsfo00newy/page/75/mode/1up?q=bassett" is from a source actually published between 1892 and 1912 (see the title page, where the 1963 is from a reprint edition). Page 75 does not support the "High Sheriff of Warwickshire". Warwichshire is on page 144 and does not mention Robert. Nor is this supported by Judith Green's more recent (and also published by the Public Record Office, so it can be assumed to have superceded the previous PRO list of early sheriffs) English Sheriffs to 1154, published in 1990. Richard Basset IS listed as sheriff of Bedfordshire (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 25 in Green), Buckinghamshire (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 28 in Green), Cambridgeshire (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 29 in Green), Essex (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 40 in Green), Hertfordshire (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 47 in Green), Huntingdonshire (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 48 in Green), Leicestershire (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 53 in Green), Northamptonshire (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 64 in Green), Nofolk (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 61 in Green), and Surrey (1129-1130 with Aubrey de Vere) (p. 77 in Green).
As a side note to the above, the title was just "Sheriff" in this period, saying the title was "High Sheriff of County" is anachronistic - note that Green in her English Sheriffs to 1154 never calls them "High Sheriffs" (nor are they styled so in Green's ODNB biography or in Keats-Rohan)
"His other sons were Ralph Basset, who held lands near Drayton, and William Basset, who held lands near Sapcote.(source, Keats-Rohan Domesday Descendants p. 166) William became a royal justice and sheriff like his father.(source, Green's biographical entry for Richard Basset in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography) Richard also had two daughters: Sibil, who married Robert de Cauz, and Matilda, who married John de Stuteville.(source Keats-Rohan as above) Ralph inherited the ancestral lands in Normandy.(source Judith Green Government of England p. 231-232)" which is a compact and well sourced description of the children, has been transformed into a list where much of the sourcing for the children has been removed and other, unsourced information has been added. While three sources are included, they are either outdated, or do not support the information given. Taking these additions in order:
"Ralph Basset High Sheriff of Leicestershire - High Sheriff of Warwickshire who married Alice had issue." which is unsourced. Note that where Ralph had lands has been removed.
" William Basset Basset High Sheriff of Leicestershire - High Sheriff of Warwickshire of Sapcote Leicestershire (source: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Basset, William (d.1185?) [1]) had issue." - there is one, no need to replace the recently written article on Ralph in the ODNB with an outdated 1900 entry from the old DNB here. Also, there is no source for the "had issue" and we are now saying William was "of Sapcote" instead of the more helpful "who held lands near Sapcote" and the "William became a royal justice and sheriff like his father." has been removed.  Note that the link given goes to a "Wikisource does not have a text with this exact name" page. I believe that page was meant.
" John Basset (d after 1160) had issue." is unsourced. And note that Green's ODNB entry does not mention a son named John, nor does Keats-Rohan. And minor quibbles - but the wikilink is to a dab page, and why is it "William Basset Basset" with Basset repeated?
"Sybil Basset, she married Robert de Cauz  had issue." is now unsourced, and even if we added back the Keats-Rohan source, the source gives the name as "Sibil" and Keats-Rohan does not say that she had children. Keats-Rohan also does not say that Sibil used the surname "Basset" - surnames are not necessarily inherited in this period, so we cannot assume that Sibil was "Sibil Basset".
"Matilda Basset she marrieds John de Stuteville descendant of Robert III de Stuteville had no issue." as above, this has lost its source, and even if we added back the Keats-Rohan source, that would not support Matilda having the surname Basset, nor that John de Stuteville was a descendant of Robert III de Stuteville and that she had no issue. Quibbles include the "she marrieds". Note that our article on Robert III de Stuteville nor the articles on Robert's two sons mention a John de Stuteville. Charles Clay and Dianna Greenway's Early Yorkshire Families (Cambridge University Press, 1973) says "The Stutevilles of Warwickshire descended from John de Stuteville, a younger son of Robert de Stuteville II." and that cites Clay's Early Yorkshire Charters vol. 9 p. 1-24, which shows in a pedigree chart that Robert II (father of Robert III) had a son John who died without issue, but that source says that this John married an Agnes. It appears unlikely that the John de Stuteville who married Matilda, daughter of Richard Basset, was a descendant of Robert III de Stuteville.
"Geoffery II Ridel married Sibylla Mauduit   had issue." where the citation format of the article has been butchered, and the neither of those sources state that Geoffrey married Sibylla Mauduit nor that he had children. (note that Domesday Descendants p. 1107 says Geoffrey married twice - once to Amice, and secondly to Sibil Mauduit, and that his heir Richard Basset (d. 1217) was a child of the first wife.)
"" is inserted here, but this template should be used when a subarticle is being summarized in a broader-coverage article (i.e. you'd use this template with Causes of World War II in the main World War II article)
"Basset witnessed a royal charter in 1135 but was dead by 1144 when his lands were granted by the Empress Matilda and her son Henry to Richard's son Geoffrey Ridel." (sourced to Keats-Rohan p. 166) has become this garbled monstrosity "Richard Basset  The government of England under Henry I by Judith A. Green Publication date 1986 states that he was dead by 1144  they refer to returning all his due inheritance, his son Geoffery retained the name of Ridel and was known as Geoffery Ridel, as per the name of his grandfather Geoffery Ridel." this presumably refers to page 231 of Green's Government of England which states "He (Richard Basset) was evidently dead by 1144 when the Empress and her son restored to Geoffrey Ridel, son of Richard Basset, all his inheritance." but if that's the case, there as some issues - first, the citation (which duplicates a citation already in use in the article) should give a page number. Second, there is no source for "they refer to returning all his due inheritance, his son Geoffery retained the name of Ridel and was known as Geoffery Ridel, as per the name of his grandfather Geoffery Ridel." Third - "due inheritance" would not be supported by Green. Fourth, nothing is mentioned about Geoffrey son of Richard "retaining the name of Ridel" and the rest.
Much of this was already previously raised here on the talk page earlier in December 204 here and remains unaddressed. Please learn how to format citations, conform citations to the style already in use in a WP:Good Article and learn to recognize when older sources have been super-ceded by newer ones - The older English Sheriffs from around 1900 is outdated compared to Green's English Sheriffs to 1154 and when there are both a Dictionary of National Biography and an Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry for a person, the ODNB entry can be considered to have super-ceded the older entry and the DNB entry should not be used as a source.
Do not restore this sort of edits until the problems pointed out here have been discussed and resolved. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:45, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Keats-Rohan, K. S. B. (2002). Domesday Descendants: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents, 1066–1166: Pipe Rolls to Cartae Baronum. Ipswich, UK: Boydell Press. ISBN 0-85115-863-3. p. 166
^
You change the date from 1999 to 2002 (which here going back was always 1999.
The children of Richard and Matilda are in any genealogical site outside of this entry.
Re John Basset he exists he had a son John Basset if you care to read the LATIN text and older sources.
" is inserted here, but this template should be used when a subarticle is being summarized in a broader-coverage article (i.e. you'd use this template with Causes of World War II in the main World War II article)
This has nothing to do with the current article.
You seem to rely in entries we cannot fact check unless one purchases the works. also, when referring to an author refer to page number etc.
I have hyperlinked the sherif information back to other Wikipedia entries. And this was rmeoved.
Ralph Basset married Alice her maiden name is unknown. This is a fact.
High Sheriff of Warwickshire - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Sheriff_of_Warwickshire
High Sheriff of Leicestershire - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Sheriff_of_Leicestershire
Their names appear there.
Do not restore this sort of edits until the problems pointed out here have been discussed and resolved.
You have not respectfully done this to me by reverting everything I do here and not allowing me to edit this article and have rolled back everything I have said in this article; I have sources for what I have placed here as an educator myself have done due diligence in what I have placed here. By talking here before removing referenced materials.
Your rollback does not expand the article and will remain in suspended time warp forever not allowing others to come in and expand the work.
This will never look like Vanderbilt family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanderbilt_family ever as I wanted to take the article to this level, and you are not allowing me to do so. Or, ever will allow me to do so.
Green, Judith A. (2004). "Basset, Richard (d. in or before 1144)" ((subscription or UK public library membership required)). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/1647. Retrieved 15 April 2011.
^ Keats-Rohan, K. S. B. (2002). Domesday Descendants: A Prosopography of Persons Occurring in English Documents, 1066–1166: Pipe Rolls to Cartae Baronum. Ipswich, UK: Boydell Press. ISBN 0-85115-863-3. p. 166
^ The government of England under Henry I : Judith A. Green : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming: Internet Archive
You over rely on these sources for your information, they obtained their work form text written centuries ago and have taken what was written back then and dare say other authors of note back in the 1800's and 1900's which is recent history have previously stated in their work. They have never said that their work is the go-to for information nor have suggested that other authors work is less superior. It is their view point.
Likewise, I can refer to an author who has written on a psychological viewpoint that was written in 1927 and could concur this to a work written in 1965 by Carl Rogers who shares a similar viewpoint and make comparisons for this. This is academic correct. We source Rogers in many academic papers for his expertise in the area that he has a major understanding of his area of expertise.
I have been doing genealogy for over 40 years and can say that yes, I refer to parish registers written in the 1500's and written in Latin. In genealogy we use Parish Registers written in the 1500-s to 1990's see https://www.freereg.org.uk/search_queries/new and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parish_register as a source as well Phillimore’s Parish Register Series etc.
Back then it was authors who have done the research and read ancient works and resources their work is not no less valuable as well as modern day works which cover their viewpoint, and the use of archive.org is a valid source in ANY genealogical research source.
As someone who has been doing this since 1984. Pipera (talk) 17:12, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
John Basset Stenton (Danelaw, 1920), 458, p. 337. son of Richard Basset and Matilda Ridel.
458
Lansd. Chart. 691. Grant by Geoffrey Ridel to John his brother of various lands in the counties of Leicester, Rutland, and Northampton. (Circa 1160.)
Documents illustrative of the social and economic history of the Danelaw, from various collections
by Stenton, F. M. (Frank Merry), 1880-1967 Publication date 1920
https://archive.org/details/documentsillustr00stenuoft/documentsillustr00stenuoft/page/337/mode/1up?q=Basset
Read the Latin text. He is the brother of Geoffory Ridel
John Basset name of wife is Unknown he had on son John page 377 of this source. I am correct and yet you removed this without asking me why and removing what I placed there yesterday. Pipera (talk) 17:23, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
https://archive.org/details/documentsillustr00stenuoft/documentsillustr00stenuoft/page/337/mode/1up?q=Basset
Read this book it is in Latin of which I can read and know what I have read.
Article construction:
Birth
Other Facts
Marriage and Issue
Death and in that order.
The article now lacks clarity and cannot be read by for research purposes or expand on the children of Richard Basset and his wife and future generations. Pipera (talk) 17:27, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
We do not look at and research in original documents. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, we summarize secondary sources - and we do not use outdated sources. And again, this is not a genealogical work, it's an encyclopedia. We don't use other Wikipedia articles as sources. (As an aside, the sheriff of Leicestershire list does not mention Richard Basset on it, and the fact that Richard was sheriff of Warwickshire (among other shires) is still in the article - we just don't list ALL the shires he was sheriff in in the lead or the infobox to avoid overloading those.) We should not be interpreting medieval Latin charters. I'm afraid that if you think that's what you should be doing for wikipedia articles, you are sadly mistaken. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
That is your opinion, in academic writing I am not interested in your opinion just that I have stated written text and this text supersedes and is additional knowledge that your primary sources have omitted.
John Basset Stenton (Danelaw, 1920), 458, p. 337. son of Richard Basset and Matilda Ridel.
458
Lansd. Chart. 691. Grant by Geoffrey Ridel to John his brother of various lands in the counties of Leicester, Rutland, and Northampton. (Circa 1160.)
Documents illustrative of the social and economic history of the Danelaw, from various collections
by Stenton, F. M. (Frank Merry), 1880-1967 Publication date 1920
https://archive.org/details/documentsillustr00stenuoft/documentsillustr00stenuoft/page/337/mode/1up?q=Basset
Read the Latin text. He is the brother of Geoffory Ridel
John Basset name of wife is Unknown he had on son John page 377 of this source. I am correct and yet you removed this without asking me why and removing what I placed there yesterday.
I can interpret medieval Latin charters for ANY article here in Wikipedia and I can go to ANY language Wikipedia site and read ANY language about anyone who is mentioned, for genealogical purposes.
Robert III de Flandre — Wikipedia https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_III_de_Flandre
Written in French and I have used this for genealogical purposes, and I can edit this article and speak French when I edit the article. As I can read French, Latin and German. Pipera (talk) 19:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English-language sources) - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(use_English-language_sources) Pipera (talk) 19:16, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Additionally, the Baset family are from France they are not English, and their ancestors are French. In completing their tree I have gone to French sources to add to the research I have on this family that are originally from France.
Likewise, If I was dealing with Alfred the Great - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_the_Great ancestor Ecgberht, King of Wessex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecgberht,_King_of_Wessex I would not be reading articles written in Latin, and other native languages to do my family tree. Pipera (talk) 19:24, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Languages used in medieval documents - The University of Nottingham
Manuscripts and Special Collections
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/manuscriptsandspecialcollections/researchguidance/medievaldocuments/languages.aspx
I leave you to read that. Pipera (talk) 19:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Conclusion
Researchers studying medieval documents must expect them to be in Latin or French. Even if they are in English, the medieval form of the language uses many words which are now obsolete or mean something different. However, many works of literature and some important parliamentary and governmental records have been translated into modern English and published. There are also plenty of books and websites to help researchers understand the medieval Latin used in title deeds and administrative records. Pipera (talk) 19:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
The entry for 827 in the C manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, listing the eight bretwaldas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Entry_for_827_in_the_Anglo-Saxon_Chronicle,_which_lists_the_eight_bretwaldas.gif
Anglo-Saxon Chroniclehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxon_Chronicle
History of English - Wikipedia  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_English
English is a West Germanic language that originated from Ingvaeonic languages brought to Britain in the mid-5th to 7th centuries AD by Anglo-Saxon migrants from what is now northwest Germany, southern Denmark and the Netherlands. T
Old English
Old English (Englisċ or Ænglisc, pronounced [ˈeŋɡliʃ]), or Anglo-Saxon,[1] was the earliest recorded form of the English language, spoken in England and southern and eastern Scotland in the Early Middle Ages. It developed from the languages brought to Great Britain by Anglo-Saxon settlers in the mid-5th century, and the first Old English literature date from the mid-7th century. After the Norman Conquest of 1066, English was replaced for several centuries by Anglo-Norman (a type of French) as the language of the upper classes. This is regarded as marking the end of the Old English era, since during the subsequent period the English language was heavily influenced by Anglo-Norman, developing into what is now known as Middle English in England and Early Scots in Scotland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English

Pipera (talk) 19:30, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

It isn't that the charter is in Latin... it's that it is a primary source. We do not do research in primary sources such as charters. See WP:PSTS: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources." Charter research is a specialized subject which we should leave to historians, such as Judith Green and K. Keats-Rohan. Each of those historians will have researched the primary sources for their three works which are cited in this article. We repeat what the secondary sources - Judith Green and K. Keats-Rohan - report, and do not do our own interpretation of the primary sources such as a charter. We are NOT researchers, we are editors of a tertiary encyclopedia. That is what you are not getting - you continue to try to include old sources and primary sources - when you include them at all... much of what you claim is sourced is not sourced in the manner that Wikipedia expects. Please take on board what I'm saying about what wikipedia is, because until you begin editing with that goal in mind, you're going to continue to have problems. And you're STILL not addressing any of the other concerns I brought forward - such as inserting information into sourced text which the source does not support, adding information with sources that do not support the information, misrepresenting sources, and an utter lack of ability to even attempt to format sources in the manner expected for a WP:Good Article. Ealdgyth (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
You fail to understand that the sources stated are not the authority of the article, before and after the publishment of the articles there will be in 50 years other sources that relegate what is here.
The point is you are not allowing me to extend this and making it a dead source.
Stuck in the sources that you have placed here.
You fail to understand that descendants of this tree like me have a right to come here and extend the family tree. Als, John Basset you fail to understand that he is the son of Richard and Matilda, and you have removed his existence from this family.
You fail to understand that the extinct peerage of this family and fail to understand that the lands and money of main Basset line from Ralph expires and goes to the Stafford lineage which you have removed from this site, also I was denied the right to explain how this occurred and the parties concerned that was wiped from these entries for the Basset tree.
That is the issue and problem here. Pipera (talk) 22:42, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
I have had over 40 years of experience in genealogy, and what I have is not secondary research it is not third hand in research we stick to the doctrine. I know how to research the Basset families, and the off lines of this tree going back over 28 generations not limited to the Basset lineage presented here.
Additional contribution to the extinction of the Lordship was the marriage of Margaret Basset to John de Bohun, 5th Earl of Hereford being the daughter of Ralph Basset, 2nd Baron Basset of Drayton After the marriage, it was discovered that the couple were related to the fourth degree of consanguinity and they were forced to live apart. An appeal to Pope John XXII resulted on 19 February 1331 in a papal commission to the bishops of Lichfield and London to hold an enquiry into the case. However, Roger Northburgh, the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, failed to act and the case was still pending when the Pope issued a further demand for an enquiry in 1334.  they had no issue.
"Regesta 100" in W. H. Bliss (1895). Calendar of Papal Registers Relating To Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 2, 1305-1342.
That is why and other factors occurred to say that the Basset line via his son became extinct.
End of story! Pipera (talk) 22:50, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
The marriage of Richard Basset: an undetected forgery in the name of Henry I
Web Page (Link to the Record)
https://academic.oup.com/histres/article-abstract/91/252/399/5603566?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Where The Record Is Found (Citation)
Historical Research, Volume 91, Issue 252, May 2018, Pages 399–406, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2281.12227 Published: 14 April 2018
Describe The Record (Notes)
Abstract A charter of Henry I, king of England from 1100 to 1135, allowed the marriage of Richard Basset to a daughter of Geoffrey Ridel, who had died in November 1120. Through the detailed provisions of the act, Basset acquired the lands that became known as the honour of Great Weldon, which passed to his descendants through many generations. Careful consideration of the terms of the charter and the circumstances surrounding its production leads to the conclusion that it is a fabrication, confected to ensure that the Ridel lands passed exclusively to the descendants of Richard Basset.
The Occupants of The Ancient office   of Sheriff of the County of Buckingham From 1135 to 1610
Web Page (Link to the Record)
http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Documents/sheriffs_of_buckingham.htm
Describe The Record (Notes)
Stephen 5 Aubrey De Vere of Castle Heningham and Bolebec Castle Arms, Quarterly Gules and Or, in the first a Mullet Argent. And, Richard Basset of Drayton Basset and Weldon, Justice of England. Arms, Barry Nebuly of Six, Argent and Gules. Henry II 1 Aubrey De Vere of Castle Heningham and Bolebec Castle And, Richard Basset of Drayton Basset and Weldon, Justice of England.
G. E. Cokayne: "The Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain, and the United Kingdom"
page 124
G E Cokayne: The Complete Peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain, and the United Kingdom; Palgrave Mac\Mmillan (New York, November 1984);
ISBN-10: 031215836X, ISBN-13: 978-0312158361
Dictionary of National Biography, Volumes 1-20, 22
http://search.ancestry.com/collections/1981/records/8411
A Genealogical History of the Dormant, Abeyant, Forfeited, and Extinct Peerages of the British Empire
By Bernard Burke · 1866
A Genealogical History of the Dormant, Abeyant, Forfeited, and Extinct Peerages of the British Empire
By Bernard https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/A_Genealogical_History_of_the_Dormant_Ab/K3MaAAAAYAAJ?q=richard+basset+%2B+maud+ridel&gbpv=1#f=falseBurke · 1866
Charters of William II and Henry I Project  David X Carpenter, Faculty of History, University of Oxford
https://actswilliam2henry1.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/h1-richard-basset-2018-1.pdf
And I know how to do adequate research. Pipera (talk) 23:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
### Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources
[edit]
Shortcuts
WP:RSPRIMARY
WP:WPNOTRS
Main page: Wikipedia:No original research § Primary, secondary and tertiary sources
Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, i.e., a document or recording that relates to or discusses information originally presented elsewhere.
Reputable tertiary sources, such as introductory-level university textbooks, almanacs, and encyclopedias, may be cited. However, although Wikipedia articles are tertiary sources, Wikipedia employs no systematic mechanism for fact-checking or accuracy. Thus, Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) in themselves are not reliable sources for any purpose (except as sources on themselves per WP:SELFSOURCE).
Primary sources are often difficult to use appropriately. Although they can be both reliable and useful in certain situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research. Although specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred. Large blocks of material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.
When editing articles in which the use of primary sources is a concern, in-line templates, such as {{primary source-inline}} and {{better source}},  Pipera (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)