Letter: Early royal ignorance
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.IN HIS travel article 'On England's roof' (Review, 16 January) Keith Waterhouse says, 'I could never understand why the Duke of Devonshire owned large tracts of Yorkshire'.
The main estates of the Duke of Devonshire are not situated in Yorkshire but in the adjoining county of Derbyshire. The explanation for this goes back to 1605 when Sir William Cavendish was created the 1st Earl of Devonshire by James I. The King, when about to bestow the earldom, turned to his aide and asked for the name of the actual title to be conferred. On being told 'Earl of Derbyshire', he retorted, 'There is no such place as Derbyshire, you mean Devonshire', and dubbed Sir William 'Earl of Devonshire'. In 1694, when the 4th Earl was created the 1st Duke, the error was compounded.
J M Griffiths
Newcastle, Staffordshire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments