Talk:Horace Walpole

message: Re: the Walpole baronies
:Baron Walpole of Walpole was created for the 1st Earl's eldest son in 1723. He passed it to his son who died unmarried. Normally this would mean it would have become extinct, so there must have been a special remainder, because it apparently passed to the famous Horace (did it? or was he bypassed?) and then to his cousin (the 1st earl of the 1806 creation), who had already succeeded to his father's creation as Baron Walpole of Wolterton. Or have I got something wrong here? Mintguy 06:34, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: If the barony became extinct (which is should have done unless there was a special remainder) and it wasn't recreated, the current Lord Walpole wouldn't be Baron Walpole of Walpole and Baron Walpole of Wolterton see Burke's peerage  Mintguy 06:49, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, there was a special remainder. Robert Walpole, the 2nd Earl of Orford of the 1742 creation, was created "Baron Walpole of Walpole" in 1723 with a special remainder, failing heirs male of his body, to his brothers, Edward and Horatio, and to his father, Robert Walpole, in like manner, with remainder finally to the heirs male of the body of his grandfather, Robert Walpole.  George Walpole, the 3rd Earl of Orford of the 1742 creation, and the 2nd Baron "Walpole of Walpole", died unmarried, at which time the Baorny passed to his uncle Horatio (Horace) Walpole (the subject of the article). He died unmarried, and the Barony devolved upon his cousin and heir male, Horatio Walpole (son of Horatio, 1st Baron "Walpole of Wolverton"). The Earldom of Orford became extinct on the death of Robert Horace Walpole in 1931, but the Baronies of Walpole of Walpole and Walpole of Wolterton devolved on his distant cousin and heir male, Robert Henry Montgomerie Walpole. -- Someone else 07:12, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: In case that's less than clear: the 2nd Earl of Orford became a peer before his father did: it was a way of honouring the father, whose political career would have been discommoded by accepting a peerage. This explains, in part, the special remainder. The father, the 1st Earl, became a peer only after retiring as Prime Minister. -- Someone else 07:27, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Gentlemen, could that have another Horace Walpole who held that position? This particular individual would have been only 13 years old in 1730.--Anglius 01:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good eye. It was his uncle, Horatio Walpole, 1st Baron Walpole of Wolterton. Fixed. Choess 02:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cofferer of the Household

message: In the opening paragraph: "and namesake of his cousin Lord Nelson." Nelson was Horatio, not Horace, so not his namesake. I have edited, but thought I'd comment here in case the author was referring to some other connection. Pipnosis 16:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Horace" is a familiar form of "Horatio", I believe. See the 1911 EB entry on him, for instance. Choess 18:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, you could be right on that one. Even if it's technically true, I think it still reads a bit odd, when most people know him as Horatio. I'm not overly set on my edit, though - your call. Pipnosis 22:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Horace was sometimes written of as Horatio Walpole and I have seen Latin epitaphs of men named Horace whose Christian names was rendered Horatius.Cloptonson (talk) 13:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Nelson Namesake

message: :Horatio Walpole, 4th Earl of Orford (24 September 1717 – 2 March 1797), more commonly known as Horace Walpole...
Quite true. Is this a case where the article title should omit a peerage inherited in old age, and not normally used about the recipient? See Bertrand Russell, Adam Nicolson, Frederick North, Lord North, Anne Isabella Byron, Baroness Byron (who was Baroness Wentworth in her last four years). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The article should be moved to "Horace Walpole".--Britannicus (talk) 20:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

text: There are other Horace Walpoles in the family but only one who is 4th Earl of Orford. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:29, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Granted. Consider, however, WP:PRIMARYUSAGE: is it overwhelmingly likely that Horace Walpole means this subject rather than his uncle? This should be in the same sense that Samuel Johnson is primary usage for the author of the Dictionary, rather any of the dozen other Sam Johnsons we have articles on. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But then there is George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron. Johnson was a case that was argued because he lacks a title or an alternate name to go by. Who knows. I don't really care either way. There are some fanatics that like to have all of the nobility with the titles. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: One step at a time; but this seems enough discussion to frame a RM and see what happens, unless someone objects tomorrow. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should start an RfC, because there is a MoS guideline on nobility somewhere. I don't remember where. But there will be a problem. I am surprised they haven't noticed so far. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: More commonly known

message: I spotted an error in the caption for the portrait of Horace Walpole circa 1755.  I'm new to the talk pages here at Wikipedia so I'm not quite sure if I'm highlighting this in the correct manner but please let me know if I should do otherwise.  The portrait is from the Strawberry Hill collection (Strawberry Hill house appearing in the background of the painting), however it is not by Antony Van Dyck since he died in the 1600s.  It's a painting by Eccardt, John Giles (British painter, d. 1779) and was painted in 1754.  It is mentioned that the painting is from Van Dyck so that may be why the caption is incorrect.  Further details of the portrait and its provenance can be found at The Lewis Walpole Library website.  If someone can correct the caption that would be great. Ptkcollins (talk) 18:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portrait circa 1755 Van Dyck 

message: The Subleyras portrait what graced this article from August 2011 to October 2012 as a likeness of Horace is actually of his cousin and successor  Horatio Walpole. I was never at ease with this portrait, which shows no signs of Horry's delicate features. The summary of the image gives the location as unknown and takes us to a Russian site as the source, which further raised my hackles. Did a little sleuthing and came up with   this site which correctly identifies it as being of Horatio and belonging to the Leeds Museums and Galleries. Several sources have it as currently hanging in Temple Newsam.
Danny Sprinkle (talk) 17:43, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meet Cousin Horatio 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Horace Walpole. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070613220104/http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/sapphick.htm to http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/sapphick.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/furniture/stories/walpole/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Horace Walpole. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103000307/http://www.richmond.gov.uk/home/leisure_and_culture/local_history_and_heritage/local_studies_collection/local_history_notes/horace_walpole_and_strawberry_hill.htm to http://www.richmond.gov.uk/home/leisure_and_culture/local_history_and_heritage/local_studies_collection/local_history_notes/horace_walpole_and_strawberry_hill.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The redirect H***** W***** has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Edward-Woodrow • talk 21:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:H***** W*****]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]