text:
Talk:Duke of Marlborough (title)

Untitled
I would put this under John Churchill not Duke of Marlborough and use the Duke of Marlborough page to direct to pages for each Duke (presuming the other dukes were notable). I know the British system is diferent but which would be easier? -rmhermen

I'm inclined to leave it. He's far more famous as "The Duke of Marlborough", and from the time he was made Earl Malborough his legal name was "Marlborough", not "John Churchill". Putting him under "John Churchill" would be like putting "John Wayne" under "Marion Morrison". As for the other dukes, fortunately none of them were more than faintly notable (the famous Winston Churchill was not duke). If push comes to shove that's what the notation 2nd Duke of..., 3rd Duke of... is for. -- PaulDrye

Then at least shouldn't he be listed as 1st Duke not just Duke. We call them Quenns Eliz. I and II, although the first Elizabeth didn't call herself that. -rmhermen

We've stepped into a difficult spot here, in which there's no good solution but popularity. During his life, I scan the following proper names for Our Man:

- John Churchill - Sandridge (short form)/John, Baron Sandridge (long form) - Marlborough/John, Earl Marlborough/John, Duke Marlborough

as well as the titles:

- Baron of Sandridge - Earl of Marlborough - Duke of Marlborough - 1st Duke of Marlborough

Ten different names correct in one way or another. Which to choose, which to choose? All I can say is that The Duke of Marlborough is known far and wide as "The Duke of Marlborough". The other eight possibilities are just trivia about his life. A reality check: Google reports 5,730 hits for "Duke of Marlborough", 539 for "1st Duke of Marlborough" and 4,440 for "John Churchill" (many of which are different people). If someone cares to type in any of the other possibilities, redirect them here, but let's stick to calling him by what he is generally known as -- PaulDrye

>his star began a meteoric rise.

...they don't go in that direction. But then again, I'm not accustumed to English metaphors.

if the queen like John Chuchill so much than why was he replaced with the duke of Ormonde?

Name of 5th Duke of Marlborough
This article links to the 5th Duke of Marlborough (1766-1840) as George Spencer-Churchill, 5th Duke of Marlborough. The article Blenheim Palace links to the same person as Charles, 5th Duke of Marlborough. Both are redlinks. Anybody know which is correct/better. -- Chris j wood 1 July 2005 19:17 (UTC)

female succession
The succession is first to John's daughters and their heirs-male:
 * Henrietta, 2d Duchess of Marlborough (no surviving male issue; she had two sons, one of whom died young and the other died two years before she did))
 * Anne, Countess of Sunderland → the present line of Dukes of Marlborough
 * Elizabeth, Duchess of Bridgewater (male issue extinct)
 * Mary, Duchess of Montagu (male issue extinct)

Next, John's grand-daughters and their heirs-male:
 * Henrietta (dau of 2d Duchess), Duchess of Newcastle (no male issue)
 * Mary (dau of 2d Duchess), Duchess of Leeds (male issue extinct)
 * Anne (dau of Sunderland), Viscountess Bateman (male issue extinct)
 * Diana (dau of Sunderland) → Dukes of Bedford
 * Anne (dau of Bridgewater) → Earls of Jersey
 * Mary (dau of Montagu), Countess of Cardigan (no male issue)
 * Isabella (dau of Montagu), Countess of Beaulieu (no male issue)

If Anne's sons' issue should go extinct, it appears clear to me that the next heir is Bedford, not Jersey as the article now says. Comments? —Tamfang 05:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Hopiakuta, why did you change my arrows above to question-marks? —Tamfang 07:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

 * You are wrong. Lady Diana Spencer's marriage to the fourth duke of Bedford only produced a still born son.  The current dukes of Bedford descend from the fourth duke's second marriage. john k (talk) 13:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Aha. Thank you. —Tamfang (talk) 16:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I've just noticed that question.

If the marks had changed, it had been inadvertent.

This is an old machine;

I was attempting to copy the arrow

into the addressbar, which did not work.

If you do it, w/ the left-facing, & the right-facing, as a searchterm , what do you get??

What about as an internallink ??

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 09:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Various arrows redirect to Arrow (symbol). Why on earth would you want to put it in the addressbar?  —Tamfang 01:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

1704 ??
The disc. has something about :

 * •Duke of Marlborough;
 * •England;
 * •Holy Roman Empire;
 * •United Provinces at Blenheim;
 * %e2%80%a2 Blenheim ;
 * •1704;...

Someone, please, disambiguate  this,...

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 15:51, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Disambiguate what?? —Tamfang 07:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I did write that. Please do not unwrite, edit, vandalize {< http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&oldid=152032956 >},...

As for the question, one portion would be: Does any specific paragraph list the extent of England, Britain, et al, late seventeenth [1600-1700] through whichever [possibly random] era? How much of Germany & France were English, &, to what extent?

Well, I could, as well, add those same questions f/ previous eras,...

Certainly, @ various moments, England has had North America, South America, Africa, Asia,...; as confusing as it is to follow that chronology, their relationship to mainland Europe is even moreso.

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 08:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Since the loss of Calais in 1702, the British crown's only possessions in France are the Channel Islands (which are not under the UK parliament). Britain captured Gibraltar in 1704, and may have had some Mediterranean islands at the time, I don't know.  From 1714 to 1837, Britain and Ireland were in crown union with Hanover, i.e. they were separate states that happened to have the same monarch.  Britain later held Heligoland, an island now part of Germany.  I hope that answers at least one portion of your question.  This is obviously not the place to give you a complete history of British overseas possessions.  —Tamfang 01:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Remainder
I find the remainder a bit confusing. So obviously, first it goes to the daughters of the first duke, and their heirs-male. Then it goes to the daughters of the daughters of the first duke, and their heirs male. After that, I'm a bit unclear. Does it next go to heirs male of daughters of daughters of daughters of the first duke? Or would the heirs male of daughters of sons of daughters of the first duke be eligible as well? If the former, I believe the next heirs after the Jerseys would be the Duke of Buccleuch and his relations. If the latter, it gets more complicated. john k (talk) 16:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The article is not really quite right in referring to it passing in the female line. What it indicates is that there are a series of special remainders in favour of daughters and on the failure of their male issue to granddaughters.  I would assume that the text given is a quotation for the origianl patent (or nearly so).  Special remainders were not all that unusual in the 18th century; all that is unusual here is that there were so many.  Another example is Viscount Cobham, a title inherited by Baron Lyttelton due to the failure of issue of a lady who had an earlier special remainder.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:28, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The issue I was getting at was how to interpret and other descendants into the future in like fashion, with the intent that the Marlborough title never become extinct. - do all great-granddaughters have special remainders, or only the daughters of his granddaughters? john k (talk) 01:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If that is an exact quotation, I would think so. However this is a remote possibility, and if it arose, I suspect that the matter would have to be determined by the House of Lords Priviledges Committee, or whoever determines the right to peerages now that most hereditary peers are excluded from the House of Lords.  Peterkingiron (talk) 20:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You would think which? —Tamfang (talk) 05:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it would still be the House of Lords Privileges committee, wouldn't it? My understanding was that they continued to rule on who was entitled to Irish peerages even after 1922, so presumably they would still decide on normal peerages.  Especially since being a hereditary peer in the peerages of England, Scotland, Great Britain, and the UK is still meaningful, at least for the moment - it is the pool from which the 92 hereditaries still in the House are chosen whenever a vacancy arises. john k (talk) 21:24, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not know, being unfamiliar with the details of the legislation. However, some one must have the job of ruling on this.  In the acse of Baronetcies, the Home Secretary acts as registrar and rules on succession.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:24, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The rules given indicate that every holder of the title will descend from the first Duke in a line that is all-female for some number of generations and then all-male for some other number of generations (either of which strictly could be zero). So only great-granddaughters (etc.) who are daughters of daughters of daughters (etc.) are treated specially. The last rule still seems ambiguous, however, because of the last-but-one rule, which appears to treat all "other" such granddaughters in age order, irrespective of the ages of their mothers: "other" excluding the daughters of the eldest daughter. In the next generation, therefore, would the corresponding "other" exclude only the daughters of the eldest daughter's eldest daughter, or the daughters of all the eldest daughter's daughters?
 * It's possible though that 'seniority' here is understood to mean primogeniture in each generation (i.e. as for male heirs). If so there is no such ambiguity, but then the rules as given seem a complicated way of stating it (which is a point against that interpretation). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.173.39.88 (talk) 13:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Remainder of subsidiary titles
Do the subsidiary titles follow the same succession or a more standard arrangement? Timrollpickering (talk) 12:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

 * I would assume that all the peerages of the first duke were affected alike by the same Act of Parliament, for the same reason; but the earldom of Sunderland and barony Spencer of Wormleighton were subsequently attached to Marlborough by marriage, and is subject to (as you say) a more standard arrangement. —Tamfang (talk) 21:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

unique female succession?

 * The Dukedom of Marlborough is the only dukedom in the United Kingdom that can still pass in the female line.

What, are there no surviving Scottish dukedoms that can? —Tamfang (talk) 21:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Remember how recent and rare Scottish dukedoms are; earldoms are more common. Our article lists eight, of which one is Rothesay (which does not descend); the oldest of the others is Hamilton (1643); presumably all of them are by patent. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

 * And the dukedom of Hamilton passed to a woman in 1651; but that was a special remainder. Oh well. —Tamfang (talk) 08:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

 * According to our articles on them, the Scottish dukedoms of Hamilton, Montrose and Roxburghe can all still be inherited by women, though it is just as hypothetical as Marlborough in the first two cases (there would have to be no heirs male at all over a dozen generations back). I'll remove the wrong claim from the article, accordingly.--141.100.201.16 (talk) 15:37, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Requested move to "Duke of Marlborough (title)"

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus here is that #1 is far and away the primary topic. To answer Peter E. James's concern, don't worry as part of executing this move I will be checking all of the links to this page in the near future. Feel free to help. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 22:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Duke of Marlborough → Duke of Marlborough (title) – This move would allow the Duke of Marlborough to become a redirect to British commander John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough (1650 – 1722), per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The first duke gets about 14,000 views a month, whereas none of the other dukes get more than 2,600 views a month. If you search for "Duke of Marlborough" -Wikipedia on Google books, you can see that this phrase generally refers to the first duke, and that it is usually used without qualification, i.e. as if it was his name. For example, there is a book entitled Blenheim 1704: The Duke of Marlborough's Masterpiece. Britannica mentions only the first duke. The 9th duke married a Vanderbilt heiress, but otherwise dukes two through eleven don't seem to done anything terribly notable. This proposal was prompted by a similar move for the article Duke of Wellington, discussed here. Kauffner (talk) 08:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Oppose as such titles should have there own article. There's been more then one Duke of Marlborough. GoodDay (talk) 21:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Naming should follow real world usage and published sources. To keep this article where it is because there is a group of obscure Wiki articles with titles in the same form is incestuous. Adding a parenthetical disambiguator to make way for a primary topic is done all the time on Wiki. If you admit that the first duke is the primary topic, then WP:PRIMARYTOPIC directs us to make this entry redirect to him. Kauffner (talk) 02:54, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be like recommending Duke of York as a re-direct to Prince Andrew of the UK. GoodDay (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Support. Nom clearly demonstrates that the first duke is the primary topic of the term "Duke of Marlborough". Jenks24 (talk) 05:16, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is probably a consistency thing for me. Maybe it's because I'm familiar with naming practices on here, but the idea that people typing in "Duke of Marlborough" are expecting to get a specific person (rather than an article on the title and those who held it) seems dubious. I'm sure QE2 is currently the most common target of the term Queen of England, but I wouldn't expect to see her article as the target of the link. Rennell435 (talk) 08:07, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- having a capnote pointing to John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough will entirely meet the nom's objection. If this is taken to an extreme, it may be asked who is the primary subject for Earl of Shaftesbury?  The first Earl, a minister under Charles II then leader of the opposition (treasonably); the third Earl, noted philosopher; or the 7th Earl, the 19th century philanthropist.  We have a convention and should stick to it.  It does not always work perfectly, but that cannot be helped.  Allowing frequent exceptions is a recipe for chaos.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:24, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That the term should lead to the primary topic is a formal rule under WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, not an exception. Kauffner (talk) 04:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

 * Support, the first duke is clearly the primary topic. It is false logic to claim that we are being "consistent" by declining to act on this - we are actually being inconsistent with the overriding WP:Primary topic principle, which serves readers well all over Wikipedia and which readers and editors expect to be followed in clear cases like this one.--Kotniski (talk) 10:52, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - per primary topic, the same principle has been adopted with Duke of Wellington. As to worries this might be a rule rather than an exception, I can't think of many instances where a title is so identified with one person save Marlborough, the Iron Duke, and the Duke of Edinburgh (though the last might be - at a push - accused of recentism). And to answer GoodDay's concern - Duke of York is much more ambiguous with King George VI, the battleship and the Grand one with all the troops. GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Support – If this works for Duke of Wellington no reason for general consensus not to have a similar move for other well known personalities, where appropriate. Also because I don't believe titles should be inherited, but earned - those who served a greater purpose to earn them title deserve the credit of having being the primary topic linked to them. As far as Wiki goes though, the results speak for themselves, and usually there is only one established person who people seek via that title. The rest are usually descendants of lesser importance. Ma ®© usBr iti sh '''  (talk) 07:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose for more or less the reasons laid out by Marcus; this will open the floodgates for well-meaning ideologues to argue their way through the peerage about which individual "deserves" to be the primary topic based on some half-baked POV. Better to be consistent with the occasional hatnote than open the door a crack for that kind of petty bickering. Choess (talk) 03:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment:Well it was only a matter of time before we got to this one. This is yet another row sparked by the agenda around WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. As that guideline is under considerable debate at present I suggest it is entirely inappropriate to be requesting moves with that as the criterion. The most suitable thing to do would be to have a moratorium on changes based on WP:PT until the matter is resolved, and I have opened an ANI notice (here)on the subject. Xyl 54 (talk) 00:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * As far as the issue here is concerned, I would strongly oppose.
 * Both pages are named in accordance with WP:TITLE and with the naming conventions of the Peerage and Biography projects. John Churchill is a featured article as it stands and there is no interest there to re-title it; in fact there was no interest in disturbing this arrangement at all before the matter was raised by the WP:DAB crew.
 * There is also no overriding reason to make this change. A search for the first duke will (now) find a redirect at Duke of Marlborough John Churchill should anyone not know the dukes name, and the DoM article has a hatnote, and a statement in the fist paragraph, referring people to the JC page if that’s what they are looking for.
 * If the project has a lot of articles with links to DoM that are meant for JC, then the solution is to fix the shoddy editing that produced them, not to impose a shoddy re-titling exercise. Xyl 54 (talk) 00:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Support same arguments as Wellington apply here. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:23, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I would further suggest that for future occurrences of this situation, we only consider the move when the person for whom the title was created is the primary topic. The rest of them can stay as they are. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Primary topic should not be the only factor. A link to Duke of Marlborough intended for John Churchill isn't incorrect, it's just less precise than it could be. If the pages were moved, the incorrect links could be misleading - the link from William Cole (scholar) would have pointed to the wrong person, and it isn't clear which Duke of Marlborough is referred to in the John Hodges Benwell article (the sources don't specify). Peter E. James (talk) 20:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
 * A comment on Peter James' concern: Duke of Marlborough (title) will be a good link for all of these, but it will rarely be difficult to pick the right Duke: for example, Benwell was born in 1764; the Duke in that year was George Spencer, 4th Duke of Marlborough. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:16, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

English and/or Scotch peerage ?
Reading Sir W. Churchill's biography, and learning without other clue that he served " as commander of the 6th Battalion of the Royal Scots Fusiliers", I was wondering whether these possible "Scottich roots" - or duties - might date back to his father. And as a matter of fact, the history of the title "Duke of Marlborough", what his father was, actually refers to the "Scottich peerage". But to the "Peerage of England" as well (Dukedom of Marlborough). May be something obvious for British people has to be precised for learners in British history, tradition and culture. Was W.Churchill Scottish ? Or can every British citizen serve in any Battalion, whatever Scottich, English or Welsh ? Thank you Crocy (talk) 16:45, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

The title Baron of Eyemouth in the Scottish Peerage and Lord in the Parliament of Scotland could not have been conferred by William - long before the Glorious Revolution! Most have been by Charles II or by James Duke of York after his period viceroy in Scotland. Fenton Robb (talk) 20:25, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Unique female succession, again
The article here claims that "It is the only current dukedom...that can pass to a woman and through a woman" (repeated further down) which seems dubious to me. Whitaker is clear enough on the rules in the UK: “''Most hereditary peerages pass on death to the nearest male heir, but there are exceptions, and several are held by women. A woman peer in her own right retains her title after marriage, and (if her husband has a title also) she is designated by two titles jointly, the inferior one second” and “…the rank of a hereditary woman peer in her own right is inherited by her eldest son (or in some cases daughter)''”. And (though there aren't any dukedoms currently held by women) they list three countesses in their own right at present (Mar, Mountbatten and Sutherland), with one female heir (Mistress of Mar), and nine Baronesses, with two female heirs. So there doen't seem to be any problem in British inheritance rules over women inheriting titles. it's also misleading; "the only dukedom...that can pass to a woman and through a woman" makes it sound like some pioneering move towards female equality. In fact, the terms of the grant are significantly worse for the Marlborough girls than they should be otherwise; under male-preference primogeniture Henrietta's daughter's wouldn't have been set aside for their male cousin. There's been no response to the cite requests for about a year, now; are there any objections to the claim being deleted? Swanny18 (talk) 17:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Nothing you have said in your post undermines the accuracy of the quote you began with. Garlicplanting (talk) 12:46, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying: So, do you have a citation to support it? The requests have been there for over a year now.
 * And it isn't so much the accuracy of the quote I'm questioning (though the Duchies of Cornwall, and Lancaster, spring to mind) but that it isn't relevant. There is nothing special in English inheritance law about titles passing “to a woman” or “through a woman”; we might just as well say it is the only current dukedom in the peerage of England that begins with an 'M': And as it is more disadvantageous than usual for this title to be passed “to” or “through a woman”, the statement is misleading.
 * Is there any good reason to keep it in? Swanny18 (talk) 20:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The DofL doesn't exist as a peerage and the DofC still doesn't have a provision for female succession. On your other point that "There is nothing special in English inheritance law about titles passing “to a woman” or “through a woman”" is just wrong. Of the ~3,500 peerages ever created the tiniest fraction have every had female succession as a possibility (most became extinct with it never occurring), the majority of those are baronies created nearly 700 years ago. Those since (except a few Scottish titles) have been created via special remainders (hint the word 'special') because they are so astonishingly rare. Only a handful have been created in the last 300 years and of those few almost all allow female succession only in the first generation so revert to (or already have) to standard male succession. So the M title remains exceptional in allowing female succession beyond the first generation and in being a Dukedom. This really isn't controversial stuff. Any of the usual peerage resources has a similar discussion for citation. Garlicplanting (talk) 11:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The DofL doesn't exist? That's questionable, surely? And “The Queen, the Duke of Lancaster” is a real person to a lot of people. Also, if DofC isn't inheritable by a woman it is certainly been inherited through a woman in the last two centuries.
 * I grant you inheritance by women suo jure is unusual (and I admit I hadn't realized how unusual 'til now: Living in a country which has, and has several times had, a female monarch, and knowing we don't go in for Salic Law here, and having looked in on the pages for Mar, Warwick, and Surrey, that have all had sui uxoris titleholders in their time, I had assumed it was more common).
 * But I still have a problem with the phrase “to a woman and through a woman”, which looks highly original to me. Not that long ago, the article simply said the succession was “through the female line” and that Marlborough got a special Act of Parliament to allow his daughters to inherit. Now, it has this phrase, and repeats it three times throughout the article. It also has to specify “current” (because we've had suo jure Duchesses before) and “dukedom” (as we have current female peers), which takes us back to dukedoms beginning with M.
 * So the phrase needs a citation (as was requested), or we should go back to the way it was; and we need to agree on whether it is significant enough to be in the introduction as one of the half-dozen most important facts about the title. Swanny18 (talk) 19:13, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * L is not a peerage it is a property holding that is called a duchy. The Crown cannot in law hold peerages. The DofC and the Duchy of C are similar - two quite separate entitles a title and a property holding. The closest thing to the mistaken Dukedom of L is the myth over the D of Normandy still misused in the C Islands. Whatever people think is the case it only matters what is fact and law. The DofC doesn't get inherited through anyone (in the peerage law sense of the word) since it is freestanding. It is automatically held by the eldest son of the sovereign even if that sovereign never held the title or could.
 * The peerages you cite are as you have now found truly very exceptional titles created 800-1000 yrs ago when succession was feudal and so female succession a possibility.
 * You won't find a citation for the specific wording since it is not a peerage law term. The form of words looks to my mind to be crafted to distinguish it from titles that can pass to but not through females or vice versa. Through the female line could be read to mean very many different things in succession terms so is probably not helpful in terms of precision. I cannot obviously think of a better form of wording that doesn't involve repeating the complicated remainder. Garlicplanting (talk) 13:48, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * So am I right in thinking this phrase is entirely made-up, that it isn't some legal description, and that it isn't (and won't be) supported by any reference or citation? In which case there shouldn't be any problem about taking it out, and putting in something more useful (and trimming the repetition down a bit at the same time). Its precision may be better than repeating the entire complicated remainder, but as the Succession section does just that anyway, the supposed precision is a little redundant, I feel.
 * And I had imagined the DofL and DofC would be special cases, but my original point was they immediately sprang to mind (and if I am (as I hope) of average intelligence, then they'll probably spring to a lot of other peoples minds, too: quite possibly they sprang to the mind of whoever requested the citations in the first place). If we have to hedge the contention in the article round with caveats like “that one's a duchy, but it's not a dukedom” or “the Queen is the Duke of Lancaster, but she isnt a duke”, or “it's a title, but not a title”, or “she can possess the DofC, but can't pass it on” then it rapidly ceases to have any relevance. We're back to “duchies beginning with M”, or “duchies named after small market towns in the West Country”, or something.
 * Anyway, I've made some changes, which resolve the issues I have and should (hopefully) satisfy the citation requirement; if they are not acceptable please revert or edit accordingly, and we can carry on here. Swanny18 (talk) 22:44, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As ever this is a very technical area and the form of words was clearly an attempt to make it easier. The Remainder being unique has no term in peerage law (though the meaning given - though not the specific words we used are amply supported in the peerage sources)
 * I obviously wasn't clear enough. The Q is not D of Lancaster or Normandy. No such titles exist. It is simply a property holding given a name of a past title. You could create a property holding called the 'Duchy of Wikipedia' it would no more make you a duke or create a dukedom.
 * I can see the edit. It needs a little fettling as one bit is now wrong. I'll reword. Garlicplanting (talk) 12:22, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for tidying up those edits.
 * On the other stuff, I can appreciate your point and I appreciate the position in peerage law; what you said was clear enough. I was just mindful not everybody sees it that way, even if it is a myth or a mistake. But I can live with it. Swanny18 (talk) 23:09, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 07 April 2015

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. There is consensus here and I think at the previous move discussion that the 1st Duke is the primary topic for the term "Duke of Marlborough". ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 05:54, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Duke of Marlborough (title) → Duke of Marlborough – It doesn't require "title" as a disambiguation. None of the other peerage articles have this. See Category:Dukedoms in the Peerage of England, Category:Dukedoms in the Peerage of Scotland etc. – —Мандичка YO 😜 03:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Many articles treat the first duke as the primary meaning. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment nominator, did you read the 2011 move discussion? -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I do not see significant validity in the arguments in the earlier thread. The current Duke of Marlborough is, in our time, a popularly referenced Duke of Marlborough but he is still just a Duke of Marlborough.  I appreciate that there is only one Duke of Marlborough at any one time but I think that there are still parallels with the use in Wikipedia of such, ahhm, titles as Baron, Count, Duke, Grand duke and Viscount etc.  The article is not about the title but about, according to the TOC: the History of the Dukedom; the Family seat; the Succession to the title; Other titles of the Dukes; the Coats of arms; the Motto; 'the Earls of Marlborough, second creation (1689); and the Dukes of Marlborough (1702).  GregKaye 07:15, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Support, articles on individuals holding substantive titles are usually and should be found under their respective names with the title suffixed. The generic "Duke of Someplace" has largely replaced "Dukes of Someplace" and "Dukedom of Someplace" as the name of the article about a title's history, succinctly referring to that of the titleholders insofar as each bore the title. No reader need desist from considering any particular duke as the Duke in their own estimation, but why should Wikipedia play favourites when it can list and link to all of them, and show us how they are connected (or not) besides? A distinction without a difference seems to be in the making: an article about the title is about "the History of the Dukedom, etc." FactStraight (talk) 07:59, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's safe to assume that nearly everyone who types in the "Duke of Marlborough" as a search term is looking for the commander who fought Louis XIV. Printed encyclopedias don't have peerage articles at all. I don't see the logic in arguing that everything else should move out of the way for them. Man from Nephew (talk) 09:57, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Printed encyclopedias don't have peerage articles at all. On a point of information: the 1911 Britannica had an article on "Marlborough, Earls and Dukes of". Opera hat (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The article title "Dukes of Marlborough" would certainly get my vote, per 1911 Britannica. As near as I can tell, the practice of referring to a peerage as "Duke of Foo" is strictly Wikipediaese. Man from Nephew (talk) 05:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Oppose -- In occasional cases, the first Duke (or a particular duke) is by far the most likely search target. Accordingly the Duke of Foo redirects to the article on that duke, and it has a capnote so that those who wanted the list article can easily reach it at a second click.  This is an estabnlished practice, whcih we should nto change.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually the nom is wrong: Duke of Wellington redirects to the first Duke. I suspect that there will be other cases of this, but they are exceptional.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Oppose per User:Peterkingiron, User:Man from Nephew and comments above. —  AjaxSmack   01:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Oppose - the "Duke of Foo" title shouldn't always redirect to the first duke, it should either redirect to the most notable and primary topic duke, or it should be a page for the title, or it should be a disambig. It's probably case specific. In this case, as says, the first duke is the primary topic, so this is fine as it is.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:53, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Wikidata description
This article is not about a "folk song". Please could someone able to correct this data do so. Thank you for looking at this. GreyGreenWhy (talk) 17:56, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * 6 months later, I am able to edit Wikidata a little so have fixed this. This is what I tried and failed to write on the talk of the wikidata entry:
 * I would be surprised if there is any language of Wikipedia on which this title refers to the folk song rather than the English noble title or the person. I have altered the description accordingly, but I cannot figure out how to change the rest of the wikidata entry. Thanks, GreyGreenWhy (talk) 14:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Viscount Churchill
The Line of succession section omits the 2nd through 5th Barons Churchill, of whom the last three were also the 1st through 3rd Viscounts Churchill, a line that became extinct in 2017: see Baron Churchill (1815 creation). Is this a deliberate omission? -- Red rose64 🌹 (talk) 14:38, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * All extinct branches are absent. --95.24.66.204 (talk) 09:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 15 May 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc . talk  06:27, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Duke of Marlborough (title) → Duke of Marlborough – The status of the 1st Duke of Marlborough as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is weak. The present (12th) Duke frequently ranks above the 1st Duke in pageviews. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose James Churchill, the 1st Duke, is of very high long term significance, far and away the primary topic. Walrasiad (talk) 22:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. You're joking, right? The 1st Duke of Marlborough is one of the most notable generals in world history and has very, very clear long-term significance. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:25, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

The line of succession and Lady Olympia
As of right now Olympia is marked #29 in succession as if she would succede to the title should all heirs male of Anne Spencer, Countess of Sunderland die. But that seems to contradict both the previous section of the article and my understanding of what the remainder says.

It says that the title goes to the 1st Duke's Heirs Male of the Body Lawfully Begotten (HMBLB); his eldest daughter and her HMBLBs; his second and other daughters, in seniority, alongside each of theirs HMBLBs; his eldest daughter's oldest daughter and her HMBLBs; his eldest daughter's second and other daughters, in seniority, alongside each of theirs HMBLBs; all other daughters of his daughters, in seniority, alongside each of theirs HMBLBs and and other descendants into the future in like fashion, with the intent that the Marlborough title never become extinct.

If I am reading it right, then Olympia could only succede if the male-line descendants of EVERY single female that was born in the previous generations counting from the 1st Duke also died out.

I am reading it as: Heirs Male of the 1st Holder, All Daughters in primogeniture order and their HMBLBs, All Granddaughters in male-preference primogeniture order and their HMBLBs, All Greatgranddaughters in male-preference primogeniture order and their HMBLBs etc? This would result in the tree below, where the marks are (Order of female and her HMBLBs, Dagger if the line is certainly extinct and otherwise a Roman numeral as the order among the living branches)

212.79.110.67 (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Coronet of a British Duke.svg John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough (1650–1722) and his HMBLBs
 * (1,†) Harriet Churchill (1679–1679) and her HMBLBs
 * (2,Coronet of a British Duke.svg) Henrietta Churchill (1681–1733) and her HMBLBs
 * (6,†) Harriet Godolphin (1701–1776) and her HMBLBs
 * (7,†) Margaret Godolphin (1703–1703) and her HMBLBs
 * (8,†) Mary Godolphin (1723–1764) and her HMBLBs
 * via Francis Osborne, 5th Duke of Leeds (1751–1799):
 * (20,IV) Mary Osborne (1776–1862) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 9th Earl of Chichester)
 * (21,†) Catherine Osborne (1791–1878) and her HMBLBs
 * (14,†) Harriot Osborne (1744–1744) and her HMBLBs
 * (3,Coronet of a British Duke.svg) Anne Churchill (1683–1716) and her HMBLBs (current line)
 * via Charles Spencer, 3rd Duke of Marlborough (1706–1758)
 * via George Spencer, 4th Duke of Marlborough (1739–1817)
 * (22,†) Caroline Spencer (1763–1813) and her HMBLBs
 * (23,V) Elizabeth Spencer (1764–1812) and her HMBLBs (a Subset of #3, headed by Robert Vere Spencer Bernard)
 * (24,VI) Charlotte Spencer (1769–1802) and her HMBLBs (possibly †)
 * (25,VII) Anne Spencer (1773–1865) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 12th Earl of Shaftesbury)
 * (26,VIII) Amelia Spencer (1774–1829) and her HMBLBs (possibly †)
 * (15,II) Diana Spencer (1734–1808) and her HMBLBs (headed by 9th Viscount Bolingbroke)
 * (27,IX) Henriette St John (1762–1834) and her HMBLBs (possibly †)
 * (28,†) Anne St John (1764–1764) and her HMBLBs
 * (29,†) Elisabeth Beauclerk (1766–1793) and her HMBLBs
 * (30,X) Mary Beauclerk (1766–1851) and her HMBLBs (possibly †)
 * (16,†) Elizabeth Spencer (1737–1831) and her HMBLBs
 * (31,†) Charlotte Herbert (1773–1784) and her HMBLBs
 * via John Spencer (1708–1746)
 * via John Spencer, 1st Earl Spencer (1734–1783)
 * (32,†) Georgiana Spencer (1757–1806) and her HMBLBs
 * (33,XI) Henrietta Spencer (1761–1821) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 12th Earl of Bessborough)
 * (34,†) Charlotte Spencer (1765–1766) and her HMBLBs
 * (35,†) Louisa Spencer (1769–1769) and her HMBLBs
 * (17,†) Diana Spencer (1735–1743) and her HMBLBs
 * (9,†) Anne Spencer (1702–1769) and her HMBLBs
 * (10,†) Diana Spencer (1710–1735) and her HMBLBs
 * (4,†) Elizabeth Churchill (1687–1714) and her HMBLBs
 * (11,I) Anne Egerton (1705–1762) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 10th Earl of Jersey)
 * via George Villiers, 4th Earl of Jersey (1735–1805):
 * (36,XII) Charlotte Villiers (1771–1808) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 28th Baron de Clifford)
 * (37,XIII) Anne Villiers (1772–1832) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 7th Earl of Durham)
 * (38,XIV) Caroline Villiers (1774–1835) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 8th Marquess of Anglesey)
 * (39,†) Georgiana Villiers (1776–1776) and her HMBLBs
 * (40,XV) Sarah Villiers (1779–1852) and her HMBLBs (possibly †)
 * (41,†) Elizabeth Villiers (1783–1810) and her HMBLBs
 * (42,†) Frances Villiers (1786–1866) and her HMBLBs
 * (43,XVI) Harriet Villiers (1788–1870) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 10th Baron Bagot of Blithfield Hall)
 * (5,†) Mary Churchill (1689–1751) and her HMBLBs
 * (12,†) Isabella Montagu (1706–1786) and her HMBLBs
 * (18,†) Isabella Hussey-Montagu (1750–1772) and her HMBLBs
 * (13,†) Mary Montagu (1711–1775) and her HMBLBs
 * (19,III) Elizabeth Montagu (1743–1827) and her HMBLBs (head by the 10th Duke of Buccleuch)
 * (44,XVII) Elizabeth Scott (1767–1837) and her HMBLBs (head by the 16th Earl Home)
 * (45,XVIII) Mary Scott (1769–1823) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 9th Earl of Courtown)
 * (46,†) Caroline Scott (1774–1854) and her HMBLBs
 * (47,XIX) Harriet Scott (1780–1833) and her HMBLBs (headed by the 13th Marquess of Lothian)

 * Yes, I think that's right (at least in principle - I haven't checked the chart). As I understand it, male-preference primogeniture applies from Generation X (with X = 1 being the 1st Duke), with the proviso that if that male line runs out, you effectively treat all the women in Generation X + 1 as if they were men; if their male line runs out, you repeat the process - but the critical point is that you only do that one generation at a time. That's only operated once: the male line from Generation 1 ran out (as the 1st Duke had no surviving sons), so the women in Generation 2 (the 1st Duke's daughters) were treated as if they were men; but some of those women's male lines still survive, so we haven't even got around to treating the women in Generation 3 as men yet. For Lady Olympia to inherit, the male lines descending from all the women in Generation 2 would need to run out, and then so would all the male lines descending from women in Generation 3, Generation 4, etc, all the way down to wherever Lady Olympia is (Generation 14, if my count is right). Of all those descended from the 1st Duke, she's probably actually one of the last in line. Proteus (Talk) 11:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Duke of Marlborough (title)


text:
December 17

Pre-1600

 * 497 BC – The first Saturnalia festival was celebrated in ancient Rome.
 * 546 – Siege of Rome: The Ostrogoths under king Totila plunder the city, by bribing the Byzantine garrison.
 * 920 – Romanos I Lekapenos is crowned co-emperor of the underage Constantine VII.
 * 942 – Assassination of William I of Normandy.
 * 1297 – King Kyawswa of Pagan is overthrown by the three Myinsaing brothers, marking the de facto end of the Pagan Kingdom.
 * 1398 – Sultan Nasir-u Din Mehmud's armies in Delhi are defeated by Timur.
 * 1538 – Pope Paul III excommunicates Henry VIII of England.
 * 1583 – Cologne War: Forces under Ernest of Bavaria defeat troops under Gebhard Truchsess von Waldburg at the Siege of Godesberg.
 * 1586 – Go-Yōzei becomes Emperor of Japan.

1601–1900

 * 1718 – War of the Quadruple Alliance: Great Britain declares war on Spain.
 * 1777 – American Revolution: France formally recognizes the United States.
 * 1790 – The Aztec calendar stone is discovered at El Zócalo, Mexico City.
 * 1807 – Napoleonic Wars: France issues the Milan Decree, which confirms the Continental System.
 * 1812 – War of 1812: U.S. forces attack a Lenape village in the Battle of the Mississinewa.
 * 1819 – Simón Bolívar declares the independence of Gran Colombia in Angostura (now Ciudad Bolívar in Venezuela).
 * 1835 – The second Great Fire of New York destroys 13 acre of New York City's Financial District.
 * 1837 – A fire in the Winter Palace of Saint Petersburg kills 30 guards.
 * 1862 – American Civil War: General Ulysses S. Grant issues General Order No. 11, expelling Jews from parts of Tennessee, Mississippi, and Kentucky.
 * 1865 – First performance of the Unfinished Symphony by Franz Schubert.
 * 1892 – First issue of Vogue is published.
 * 1896 – Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania's Schenley Park Casino, which was the first multi-purpose arena with the technology to create an artificial ice surface in North America, is destroyed in a fire.

1901–present

 * 1903 – The Wright brothers make the first controlled powered, heavier-than-air flight in the Wright Flyer at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.
 * 1907 – Ugyen Wangchuck is crowned first King of Bhutan.
 * 1918 – Darwin Rebellion: Up to 1,000 demonstrators march on Government House in Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.
 * 1926 – Antanas Smetona assumes power in Lithuania as the 1926 coup d'état is successful.
 * 1927 – Indian revolutionary Rajendra Lahiri is hanged in Gonda jail, Uttar Pradesh, India, two days before the scheduled date.
 * 1928 – Indian revolutionaries Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev Thapar and Shivaram Rajguru assassinate British police officer James Saunders in Lahore, Punjab, to avenge the death of Lala Lajpat Rai at the hands of the police. The three were executed in 1931.
 * 1933 – The first NFL Championship Game is played at Wrigley Field in Chicago between the New York Giants and Chicago Bears. The Bears won 23–21.
 * 1935 – First flight of the Douglas DC-3.
 * 1938 – Otto Hahn discovers the nuclear fission of the heavy element uranium, the scientific and technological basis of nuclear energy.
 * 1939 – World War II: Battle of the River Plate: The Admiral Graf Spee is scuttled by Captain Hans Langsdorff outside Montevideo.
 * 1943 – All Chinese are again permitted to become citizens of the United States upon the repeal of the Act of 1882 and the introduction of the Magnuson Act.
 * 1944 – World War II: Battle of the Bulge: Malmedy massacre: American 285th Field Artillery Observation Battalion POWs are shot by Waffen-SS Kampfgruppe Joachim Peiper.
 * 1945 – Kurdistan flag day, the flag of Kurdistan was raised for the first time in Mahabad in eastern Kurdistan (Iran).
 * 1947 – First flight of the Boeing B-47 Stratojet strategic bomber.
 * 1948 – The Finnish Security Police is established to remove communist leadership from its predecessor, the State Police.
 * 1950 – The F-86 Sabre's first mission over Korea.
 * 1951 – The American Civil Rights Congress delivers "We Charge Genocide" to the United Nations.
 * 1957 – The United States successfully launches the first Atlas intercontinental ballistic missile at Cape Canaveral, Florida.
 * 1960 – Troops loyal to Emperor Haile Selassie in Ethiopia crush the coup that began December 13, returning power to their leader upon his return from Brazil. Haile Selassie absolves his son of any guilt.
 * 1960  – Munich C-131 crash: Twenty passengers and crew on board as well as 32 people on the ground are killed.
 * 1961 – Niterói circus fire: Fire breaks out during a performance by the Gran Circus Norte-Americano in the city of Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, killing more than 500.
 * 1967 – Harold Holt, Prime Minister of Australia, disappears while swimming near Portsea, Victoria, and is presumed drowned.
 * 1969 – Project Blue Book: The United States Air Force closes its study of UFOs.
 * 1970 – Polish protests: In Gdynia, soldiers fire at workers emerging from trains, killing dozens.
 * 1973 – Thirty passengers are killed in an attack by Palestinian terrorists on Rome's Leonardo da Vinci–Fiumicino Airport.
 * 1981 – American Brigadier General James L. Dozier is abducted by the Red Brigades in Verona, Italy.
 * 1983 – Provisional IRA members detonate a car bomb at Harrods Department Store in London. Three police officers and three civilians are killed.
 * 1989 – Romanian Revolution: Protests continue in Timișoara, Romania, with rioters breaking into the Romanian Communist Party's District Committee building and attempting to set it on fire.
 * 1989  – Fernando Collor de Mello defeats Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in the second round of the Brazilian presidential election, becoming the first democratically elected President in almost 30 years.
 * 1989  – The Simpsons premieres on television with the episode "Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire".
 * 1997 – Peruvian internal conflict: 14 members of the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement provoke a hostage crisis by taking over the Japanese embassy in Lima.
 * 1997  – Aerosvit Flight 241: A Yakovlev Yak-42 crashes into the Pierian Mountains near Thessaloniki Airport in Thessaloniki, Greece, killing all 70 people on board.
 * 2002 – Second Congo War: The Congolese parties of the Inter Congolese Dialogue sign a peace accord which makes provision for transitional governance and legislative and presidential elections within two years.
 * 2003 – The Soham murder trial ends at the Old Bailey in London, with Ian Huntley found guilty of two counts of murder. His girlfriend, Maxine Carr, is found guilty of perverting the course of justice.
 * 2003  – SpaceShipOne, piloted by Brian Binnie, makes its first powered and first supersonic flight.
 * 2003  – Sex work rights activists establish December 17 (or "D17") as International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers to memorialize victims of a serial killer who targeted prostitutes, and highlight State violence against sex workers by police and others.
 * 2005 – Anti-World Trade Organization protesters riot in Wan Chai, Hong Kong.
 * 2005  – Jigme Singye Wangchuck abdicates the throne as King of Bhutan.
 * 2009 – MV Danny F II sinks off the coast of Lebanon, resulting in the deaths of 44 people and over 28,000 animals.
 * 2010 – Mohamed Bouazizi sets himself on fire. This act became the catalyst for the Tunisian Revolution and the wider Arab Spring.
 * 2014 – The United States and Cuba re-establish diplomatic relations after severing them in 1961.

Pre-1600

 * 1239 – Kujō Yoritsugu, Japanese shōgun (d. 1256)
 * 1267 – Emperor Go-Uda of Japan (d. 1324)
 * 1554 – Ernest of Bavaria, Roman Catholic bishop (d. 1612)
 * 1556 – Abdul Rahim Khan-I-Khana, poet in Mughal Empire (d. 1627)
 * 1574 – Pedro Téllez-Girón, 3rd Duke of Osuna, Spanish nobleman and politician (d. 1624)

1601–1900

 * 1616 – Roger L'Estrange, English pamphleteer and author (d. 1704)
 * 1619 – Prince Rupert of the Rhine (d. 1682)
 * 1632 – Anthony Wood, English historian and author (d. 1695)
 * 1685 – Thomas Tickell, English poet (d. 1740)
 * 1699 – Charles-Louis Mion, French composer and educator (d. 1775)
 * 1706 – Émilie du Châtelet, French mathematician and physicist (d. 1749)
 * 1734 – Maria I of Portugal (d. 1816)
 * 1749 – Domenico Cimarosa, Italian composer and educator (d. 1801)
 * 1778 – Humphry Davy, English chemist and physicist (d. 1829)
 * 1796 – Thomas Chandler Haliburton, Canadian judge and politician (d. 1865)
 * 1797 – Joseph Henry, American physicist and engineer (d. 1878)
 * 1807 – John Greenleaf Whittier, American poet and activist (d. 1892)
 * 1812 – Vilhelm Petersen, Danish painter (d. 1880)
 * 1827 – Alexander Wassilko von Serecki, Austrian lawyer and politician (d. 1893)
 * 1830 – Jules de Goncourt, French author and critic (d. 1870)
 * 1835 – Alexander Emanuel Agassiz, Swiss-American ichthyologist and engineer (d. 1910)
 * 1840 – Nozu Michitsura, Japanese field marshal (d. 1908)
 * 1842 – Sophus Lie, Norwegian mathematician and academic (d. 1899)
 * 1847 – Émile Faguet, French author and critic (d. 1916)
 * 1853 – Pierre Paul Émile Roux, French physician and immunologist, co-founded the Pasteur Institute (d. 1933)
 * 1858 – Eva Nansen, Norwegian mezzo-soprano singer and pioneer on women skiing (d. 1907)
 * 1859 – Paul César Helleu, French painter and illustrator (d. 1927)
 * 1866 – Kazys Grinius, Lithuanian physician and politician, third President of Lithuania (d. 1950)
 * 1873 – Ford Madox Ford, English novelist, poet, and critic  (d. 1939)
 * 1874 – William Lyon Mackenzie King, Canadian economist and politician, tenth Prime Minister of Canada (d. 1950)
 * 1881 – Aubrey Faulkner, South African-English cricketer and coach (d. 1930)
 * 1884 – Alison Uttley, English children's book writer (d. 1976)
 * 1887 – Josef Lada, Czech painter and illustrator (d. 1957)
 * 1890 – Prince Joachim of Prussia (d. 1920)
 * 1892 – Sam Barry, American basketball player and coach (d. 1950)
 * 1893 – Charles C. Banks, English captain and pilot (d. 1971)
 * 1893  – Erwin Piscator, German director and producer (d. 1966)
 * 1894 – Arthur Fiedler, American conductor (d. 1979)
 * 1894  – Patrick Flynn, Irish-American runner and soldier (d. 1969)
 * 1894  – Wim Schermerhorn, Dutch cartographer, engineer, and politician, Prime Minister of the Netherlands (d. 1977)
 * 1895 – Gerald Patterson, Australian tennis player (d. 1967)
 * 1898 – Loren Murchison, American sprinter (d. 1979)
 * 1900 – Mary Cartwright, English mathematician and academic, one of the first people to analyze a dynamical system with chaos (d. 1998)

1901–present

 * 1903 – Erskine Caldwell, American novelist and short story writer (d. 1987)
 * 1903  – Ray Noble, English bandleader, composer, and actor (d. 1978)
 * 1904 – Paul Cadmus, American painter and illustrator (d. 1999)
 * 1905 – Simo Häyhä, Finnish soldier and sniper (d. 2002)
 * 1905  – Mohammad Hidayatullah, 11th Chief Justice of India, and politician, sixth Vice President of India (d. 1992)
 * 1905  – Erico Verissimo, Brazilian author and translator (d. 1975)
 * 1906 – Fernando Lopes-Graça, Portuguese composer and conductor (d. 1994)
 * 1906  – Russell C. Newhouse, American pilot and engineer (d. 1998)
 * 1908 – Willard Libby, American chemist and academic, Nobel Prize laureate (d. 1980)
 * 1910 – Eknath Easwaran, Indian-American educator and author (d. 1999)
 * 1910  – Sy Oliver, American singer-songwriter and trumpet player (d. 1988)
 * 1912 – Edward Short, Baron Glenamara, English captain and politician, Lord President of the Council (d. 2012)
 * 1913 – Burt Baskin, American businessman, co-founded Baskin-Robbins (d. 1967)
 * 1914 – Mushtaq Ali, Indian cricketer (d. 2005)
 * 1914  – Fernando Alonso, Cuban ballet dancer, co-founded the Cuban National Ballet (d. 2013)
 * 1916 – Penelope Fitzgerald, English author and poet (d. 2000)
 * 1917 – Kenneth Dike, Nigerian historian, author, and academic (d. 1983)
 * 1920 – Kenneth E. Iverson, Canadian computer scientist, developed the APL programming language (d. 2004)
 * 1921 – Lore Berger, German-Swiss author and translator (d. 1943)
 * 1922 – Alan Voorhees, American engineer and academic (d. 2005)
 * 1923 – Jaroslav Pelikan, American historian and scholar (d. 2006)
 * 1926 – Ray Jablonski, American baseball player (d. 1985)
 * 1926  – John Hans Krebs, American lawyer and politician (d. 2014)
 * 1926  – Stephen Lewis, English actor, director, screenwriter, and playwright (d. 2015)
 * 1927 – Richard Long, American actor and director (d. 1974)
 * 1927  – Edward Meneeley, American painter and sculptor (d. 2012)
 * 1928 – Marilyn Beck, American journalist (d. 2014)
 * 1928  – Eli Beeding, American captain and pilot (d. 2013)
 * 1928  – Doyle Conner, American farmer and politician, seventh Florida Commissioner of Agriculture (d. 2012)
 * 1929 – William Safire, American journalist and author (d. 2009)
 * 1930 – Bob Guccione, American photographer and publisher, founded Penthouse (d. 2010)
 * 1930  – Armin Mueller-Stahl, German actor and painter
 * 1930  – Dorothy Rowe, Australian psychologist and author (d. 2019)
 * 1931 – Gerald Finnerman, American director and cinematographer (d. 2011)
 * 1931  – Dave Madden, Canadian-American actor (d. 2014)
 * 1931  – James McGaugh, American neurobiologist and psychologist
 * 1932 – John Bond, English footballer and manager (d. 2012)
 * 1934 – Irving Petlin, American painter and academic (d. 2018)
 * 1934  – Ray Wilson, English footballer and manager (d. 2018)
 * 1935 – Brian Langford, English cricketer (d. 2013)
 * 1935  – Cal Ripken Sr., American baseball player, coach, and manager (d. 1999)
 * 1936 – Pope Francis
 * 1936  – Tommy Steele, English singer, guitarist, and actor
 * 1937 – Brian Hayes, Australian-English radio host
 * 1937  – Art Neville, American singer and keyboard player (d. 2019)
 * 1937  – Kerry Packer, Australian businessman, founded World Series Cricket (d. 2005)
 * 1937  – John Kennedy Toole,  American novelist (d. 1969)
 * 1937  – Calvin Waller, American general (d. 1996)
 * 1938 – Peter Snell, New Zealand runner (d. 2019)
 * 1939 – James Booker, American pianist (d. 1983)
 * 1939  – Eddie Kendricks, American R&B singer-songwriter (d. 1992)
 * 1940 – Kåre Valebrokk, Norwegian journalist (d. 2013)
 * 1940  – María Elena Velasco, Mexican actress, singer, director, and screenwriter (d. 2015)
 * 1941 – Dave Dee, English singer-songwriter and guitarist (d. 2009)
 * 1941  – Stan Mudenge, Zimbabwean historian and politician, Zimbabwean Minister of Foreign Affairs (d. 2012)
 * 1942 – Muhammadu Buhari, Nigerian general and politician, 7th Head of State of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
 * 1942  – Paul Butterfield, American singer and harmonica player (d. 1987)
 * 1943 – Ron Geesin, Scottish pianist and composer
 * 1944 – Jack L. Chalker, American author and educator (d. 2005)
 * 1944  – Carlo M. Croce, Italian-American oncologist and academic
 * 1944  – Bernard Hill, English actor (d. 2024)
 * 1945 – Ernie Hudson, American actor
 * 1945  – David Mallet, English director
 * 1945  – Chris Matthews, American journalist and author
 * 1945  – Jüri Talvet, Estonian poet and critic
 * 1945  – Jacqueline Wilson, English author and academic
 * 1946 – Simon Bates, English radio host
 * 1946  – Eugene Levy, Canadian actor, director, and screenwriter
 * 1947 – Wes Studi, American actor and producer
 * 1948 – Valery Belousov, Russian ice hockey player and coach (d. 2015)
 * 1948  – Jim Bonfanti, American rock drummer
 * 1948  – Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, Turkish economist and politician
 * 1949 – Joel Brooks, American actor
 * 1949  – Sotiris Kaiafas, Cypriot footballer
 * 1949  – Paul Rodgers, English singer-songwriter and producer
 * 1950 – Laurence F. Johnson, American educator and author
 * 1950  – Maurice Peoples, American sprinter and coach
 * 1951 – Pat Hill, American football player and coach
 * 1951  – Ken Hitchcock, Canadian ice hockey player and coach
 * 1951  – Tatyana Kazankina, Russian runner
 * 1953 – Bill Pullman, American actor
 * 1954 – Sergejus Jovaiša, Lithuanian basketball player
 * 1955 – Brad Davis, American basketball player, coach, and sportscaster
 * 1956 – Peter Farrelly, American director, producer, and screenwriter
 * 1956  – Dominic Lawson, English journalist and author
 * 1956  – Totka Petrova, Bulgarian runner
 * 1957 – Wendy Hoyte, English sprinter
 * 1957  – Bob Ojeda, American baseball player and coach
 * 1958 – Mike Mills, American bass player, songwriter, and producer
 * 1959 – Bob Stinson, American songwriter and guitarist (d. 1995)
 * 1961 – Mansoor al-Jamri, Bahraini journalist and author
 * 1961  – Sara Dallin, English singer
 * 1962 – Paul Dobson, English footballer
 * 1962  – Galina Malchugina, Russian sprinter
 * 1962  – Rocco Mediate, American golfer and journalist
 * 1964 – Frank Musil, Czech ice hockey player and coach
 * 1964  – Joe Wolf, American basketball player and coach
 * 1965 – Craig Berube, Canadian ice hockey player and coach
 * 1965  – Jeff Grayer, American basketball player and coach
 * 1966 – Tracy Byrd, American singer-songwriter and guitarist
 * 1966  – Kristiina Ojuland, Estonian politician, 23rd Estonian Minister of Foreign Affairs
 * 1967 – Vincent Damphousse, Canadian ice hockey player and sportscaster
 * 1967  – Gigi D'Agostino, Italian muscisian, singer and DJ.
 * 1967  – Karsten Neitzel, German footballer and manager
 * 1968 – Claudio Suárez, Mexican footballer
 * 1968  – Paul Tracy, Canadian race car driver and sportscaster
 * 1969 – Laurie Holden, American actress and model
 * 1969  – Inna Lasovskaya, Russian triple jumper
 * 1969  – Chuck Liddell, American mixed martial artist and kick-boxer
 * 1969  – Mick Quinn, English singer-songwriter, guitarist and producer
 * 1970 – Sean Patrick Thomas, American actor
 * 1971 – Claire Forlani, English actress
 * 1971  – Alan Khan, South African radio and TV presenter
 * 1971  – Nikki McCray-Penson, American basketball player and coach (d. 2023)
 * 1971  – Antoine Rigaudeau, French basketball player
 * 1972 – John Abraham, Indian actor and producer
 * 1972  – Iván Pedroso, Cuban long jumper and coach
 * 1973 – Eddie Fisher, American drummer
 * 1973  – Konstadinos Gatsioudis, Greek javelin thrower
 * 1973  – Rian Johnson, American director, producer, and screenwriter
 * 1973  – Paula Radcliffe, English runner
 * 1973  – Hasan Vural, German-Turkish footballer
 * 1974 – Charl Langeveldt, South African cricketer
 * 1974  – Sarah Paulson, American actress
 * 1974  – Giovanni Ribisi, American actor
 * 1974  – Marissa Ribisi, American actress
 * 1975 – Nick Dinsmore, American wrestler and trainer
 * 1975  – Susanthika Jayasinghe, Sri Lankan sprinter
 * 1975  – Milla Jovovich, Ukrainian-American actress
 * 1976 – Éric Bédard, Canadian speed skater and coach
 * 1976  – Nir Davidovich, Israeli footballer and manager
 * 1976  – Patrick Müller, Swiss footballer
 * 1976  – Andrew Simpson, English sailor (d. 2013)
 * 1976  – Takeo Spikes, American football player and sportscaster
 * 1977 – Arnaud Clément, French tennis player
 * 1977  – Samuel Påhlsson, Swedish ice hockey player
 * 1977  – Katheryn Winnick, Canadian actress
 * 1978 – Alex Cintrón, Puerto Rican baseball player and sportscaster
 * 1978  – Riteish Deshmukh, Indian film actor, producer and architect
 * 1978  – Manny Pacquiao, Filipino boxer and politician
 * 1978  – Neil Sanderson, Canadian drummer and songwriter
 * 1978  – Chase Utley, American baseball player
 * 1979 – Matt Murley, American ice hockey player
 * 1979  – Paul Smith, English footballer
 * 1980 – Suzy Batkovic, Australian basketball player
 * 1980  – Ryan Hunter-Reay, American race car driver
 * 1980  – Alexandra Papageorgiou, Greek hammer thrower
 * 1980  – Eli Pariser, American activist and author
 * 1981 – Jerry Hsu, American skateboarder and photographer
 * 1981  – Tim Wiese, German footballer
 * 1982 – Josh Barfield, American baseball player
 * 1982  – Lorenzo Cittadini, Italian rugby player
 * 1982  – Craig Kielburger, Canadian activist and author
 * 1982  – Stéphane Lasme, Gabonese basketball player
 * 1983 – Gregory Campbell, Canadian ice hockey player and executive
 * 1983  – Erik Christensen, Canadian ice hockey player
 * 1983  – Mikky Ekko, American singer and songwriter
 * 1983  – Haron Keitany, Kenyan runner
 * 1983  – Sébastien Ogier, French race car driver
 * 1984 – Luis Alfageme, Argentinian footballer
 * 1984  – Julian Bennett, English footballer
 * 1984  – Andrew Davies, English footballer
 * 1984  – Shannon Woodward, American actress
 * 1985 – Fernando Abad, Dominican baseball player
 * 1985  – Łukasz Broź, Polish footballer
 * 1985  – Craig Reid, English footballer
 * 1986 – Emma Bell, American actress
 * 1986  – Frank Winterstein, Australian-Samoan rugby league player
 * 1986  – Vanessa Zima, American actress
 * 1987 – Maryna Arzamasova, Belarusian middle-distance runner
 * 1987  – Bo Guagua, Chinese businessman
 * 1987  – Chelsea Manning, American soldier and intelligence analyst
 * 1987  – Donovan Solano, Colombian baseball player
 * 1988 – Liisa Ehrberg, Estonian cyclist
 * 1988  – Grethe Grünberg, Estonian ice dancer
 * 1988  – Kris Joseph, Canadian basketball player
 * 1988  – David Rudisha, Kenyan runner
 * 1988  – Craig Sutherland, Scottish footballer
 * 1989 – Taylor York, American musician
 * 1990 – Graham Rogers, American actor
 * 1991 – Jordan Rankin, Australian rugby league player
 * 1991  – Atsedu Tsegay, Ethiopian runner
 * 1992 – Quinton de Kock, South African cricketer
 * 1992  – Buddy Hield, Bahamian basketball player
 * 1992  – Joshua Ingram, Canadian drummer and percussionist
 * 1993 – Kiersey Clemons, American actress
 * 1993  – Patricia Kú Flores, Peruvian tennis player
 * 1994 – Lloyd Perrett, New Zealand rugby league player
 * 1994  – Nat Wolff, American singer-songwriter, keyboard player and actor
 * 1995 – Guerschon Yabusele, French basketball player
 * 1996 – Elizaveta Tuktamysheva, Russian figure skater
 * 1997 – Naiktha Bains, British-Australian tennis player
 * 1997  – Shoma Uno, Japanese figure skater
 * 1998 – Jasmine Armfield, English actress
 * 1998  – Martin Ødegaard, Norwegian footballer
 * 1999 – Mirei Sasaki, Japanese singer, model, and actress

Pre-1600

 * 779 – Sturm, abbot of Fulda
 * 908 – al-Abbas ibn al-Hasan al-Jarjara'i, Abbasid vizier
 * 908  – Abdallah ibn al-Mu'tazz, Abbasid prince and poet, anti-caliph for one day
 * 942 – William I, duke of Normandy
 * 1187 – Pope Gregory VIII (b. 1100)
 * 1195 – Baldwin V, Count of Hainaut (b. 1150)
 * 1273 – Rumi, Persian jurist, theologian, and poet (b. 1207)
 * 1316 – Juan Fernández, bishop-elect of León
 * 1419 – William Gascoigne, Chief Justice of England
 * 1471 – Infanta Isabel, Duchess of Burgundy (b. 1397)
 * 1559 – Irene di Spilimbergo, Italian Renaissance poet and painter (b. 1538)
 * 1562 – Eleonora di Toledo, Grand Duchess of Tuscany (b. 1522)

1601–1900

 * 1663 – Nzinga of Ndongo and Matamba (b. 1583)
 * 1721 – Richard Lumley, 1st Earl of Scarbrough, English soldier and politician, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (b. 1640)
 * 1830 – Simón Bolívar, Venezuelan general and politician, second President of Venezuela (b. 1783)
 * 1833 – Kaspar Hauser, German feral child (b. 1812?)
 * 1847 – Marie Louise, Duchess of Parma (b. 1791)
 * 1857 – Francis Beaufort, Irish hydrographer and officer in the Royal Navy (b. 1774)
 * 1891 – José María Iglesias, Mexican politician and interim President (1876-1877) (b. 1823)

1901–present

 * 1904 – William Shiels, Irish-Australian politician, 16th Premier of Victoria (b. 1848)
 * 1907 – William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin, Irish-Scottish physicist and engineer (b. 1824)
 * 1909 – Leopold II of Belgium (b. 1835)
 * 1917 – Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, English physician and activist (b. 1836)
 * 1927 – Rajendra Lahiri, Indian activist (b. 1892)
 * 1928 – Frank Rinehart, American photographer (b. 1861)
 * 1929 – Manuel de Oliveira Gomes da Costa, Portuguese general and politician, tenth President of Portugal (b. 1863)
 * 1930 – Peter Warlock, Welsh composer and critic (b. 1894)
 * 1932 – Charles Winckler, Danish discus thrower, shot putter, and tug of war competitor (b. 1867)
 * 1933 – 13th Dalai Lama (b. 1876)
 * 1935 – Lizette Woodworth Reese, American poet (b. 1856)
 * 1940 – Alicia Boole Stott, Anglo-Irish mathematician and academic (b. 1860)
 * 1942 – Allen Bathurst, Lord Apsley, English lieutenant and politician (b. 1895)
 * 1947 – Christos Tsigiridis, Greek engineer (b. 1877)
 * 1956 – Eddie Acuff, American actor (b. 1903)
 * 1957 – Dorothy L. Sayers, English author, poet, and playwright (b. 1893)
 * 1962 – Thomas Mitchell, American actor (b. 1892)
 * 1964 – Victor Francis Hess, Austrian-American physicist and academic, Nobel Prize laureate (b. 1883)
 * 1967 – Harold Holt, Australian lawyer and politician, 17th Prime Minister of Australia (b. 1908)
 * 1970 – Oliver Waterman Larkin, American historian, author, and educator (b. 1896)
 * 1978 – Don Ellis, American trumpet player, composer, and bandleader (b. 1934)
 * 1981 – Antiochos Evangelatos, Greek composer and conductor (b. 1903)
 * 1982 – Homer S. Ferguson, American lawyer, judge, and politician (b. 1889)
 * 1986 – Guillermo Cano Isaza, Colombian journalist (b. 1925)
 * 1987 – Bernardus Johannes Alfrink, Dutch cardinal (b. 1900)
 * 1987  – Linda Wong, American porn actress (b. 1951)
 * 1987  – Marguerite Yourcenar, Belgian-American author and poet (b. 1903)
 * 1992 – Günther Anders, German journalist and philosopher (b. 1902)
 * 1992  – Dana Andrews, American actor (b. 1909)
 * 1999 – Rex Allen, American singer-songwriter and actor (b. 1920)
 * 1999  – Grover Washington Jr., American singer-songwriter and saxophonist (b. 1943)
 * 1999  – C. Vann Woodward, American historian and academic (b. 1908)
 * 2002 – K. W. Devanayagam, Sri Lankan lawyer and politician, tenth Sri Lankan Minister of Justice (b. 1910)
 * 2003 – Otto Graham, American football player and coach (b. 1921)
 * 2004 – Tom Wesselmann, American painter and sculptor (b. 1931)
 * 2005 – Jack Anderson, American journalist and author (b. 1922)
 * 2005  – Marc Favreau, Canadian actor and poet (b. 1929)
 * 2005  – Haljand Udam, Estonian orientalist and academic (d. 1936)
 * 2006 – Larry Sherry, American baseball player and coach (b. 1935)
 * 2008 – Sammy Baugh, American football player and coach (b. 1914)
 * 2008  – Freddy Breck, German singer-songwriter, producer, and journalist (b. 1942)
 * 2008  – Dave Smith, American baseball player and coach (b. 1955)
 * 2008  – Gregoire, Congolese chimpanzee, oldest recorded (b. 1942)
 * 2009 – Chris Henry, American football player (b. 1983)
 * 2009  – Jennifer Jones, American actress (b. 1919)
 * 2009  – Alaina Reed Hall, American actress (b. 1946)
 * 2010 – Captain Beefheart, American singer-songwriter (b. 1941)
 * 2010  – Walt Dropo, American basketball and baseball player (b. 1923)
 * 2010  – Ralph Coates, English footballer (b. 1946)
 * 2011 – Eva Ekvall, Venezuelan journalist and author, Miss Venezuela 2000 (b. 1983)
 * 2011  – Kim Jong-il, North Korean commander and politician, second Supreme Leader of North Korea (b. 1941)
 * 2012 – Richard Adams, Filipino-American activist (b. 1947)
 * 2012  – James Gower, American priest and activist, co-founded the College of the Atlantic (b. 1922)
 * 2012  – Daniel Inouye, American captain and politician (b. 1924)
 * 2012  – Laurier LaPierre, Canadian historian, journalist, and politician (b. 1929)
 * 2012  – Frank Pastore, American baseball player and radio host (b. 1957)
 * 2013 – Fred Bruemmer, Latvian-Canadian photographer (b. 1929)
 * 2013  – Ricardo María Carles Gordó, Spanish cardinal (b. 1926)
 * 2013  – Richard Heffner, American historian and television host (b. 1925)
 * 2013  – Tetsurō Kashibuchi, Japanese drummer, songwriter, and producer (b. 1950)
 * 2013  – Janet Rowley,  American geneticist and biologist (b. 1925)
 * 2013  – Conny van Rietschoten, Dutch sailor (b. 1926)
 * 2014 – Dieter Grau, German-American scientist and engineer (b. 1913)
 * 2014  – Richard C. Hottelet, American journalist (b. 1917)
 * 2014  – Oleh Lysheha, Ukrainian poet and playwright (b. 1949)
 * 2014  – Lowell Steward, American captain (b. 1919)
 * 2014  – Ivan Vekić, Croatian colonel, lawyer, and politician, Croatian Minister of the Interior (b. 1938)
 * 2015 – Hal Brown, American baseball player and manager (b. 1924)
 * 2015  – Osamu Hayaishi, American-Japanese biochemist and academic (b. 1920)
 * 2015  – Michael Wyschogrod, German-American philosopher and theologian (b. 1928)
 * 2016 – Benjamin A. Gilman, American soldier and politician (b. 1922)
 * 2016  – Henry Heimlich, American doctor (b. 1920)
 * 2016  – Gordon Hunt, American voice director (b. 1929)
 * 2020 – Jeremy Bullock, English actor (b. 1945)
 * 2020  – Allen Dines, American politician (b. 1921)
 * 2023 – Ronaldo Valdez, Filipino actor (b. 1947)
 * 2023 – James McCaffrey, American actor (b. 1958)

Holidays and observances

 * Christian feast day:
 * Daniel the Prophet
 * Josep Manyanet i Vives
 * Lazarus of Bethany (local commemoration in Cuba)
 * O Sapientia
 * Olympias the Deaconess
 * Wivina
 * Sturm
 * December 17 (Eastern Orthodox liturgics)
 * Accession Day (Bahrain)
 * International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers
 * Kurdish Flag Day (Global Kurdish population)
 * National Day (Bhutan)
 * Pan American Aviation Day (United States)
 * Wright Brothers Day, a United States federal observance by Presidential proclamation

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: December 17


text:
Difference engine

A difference engine is an automatic mechanical calculator designed to tabulate polynomial functions. It was designed in the 1820s, and was first created by Charles Babbage. The name difference engine is derived from the method of divided differences, a way to interpolate or tabulate functions by using a small set of polynomial co-efficients. Some of the most common mathematical functions used in engineering, science and navigation are built from logarithmic and trigonometric functions, which can be approximated by polynomials, so a difference engine can compute many useful tables.

History

The notion of a mechanical calculator for mathematical functions can be traced back to the Antikythera mechanism of the 2nd century BC, while early modern examples are attributed to Pascal and Leibniz in the 17th century.

In 1784 J. H. Müller, an engineer in the Hessian army, devised and built an adding machine and described the basic principles of a difference machine in a book published in 1786 (the first written reference to a difference machine is dated to 1784), but he was unable to obtain funding to progress with the idea.

Charles Babbage's difference engines
Charles Babbage began to construct a small difference engine in c. 1819 and had completed it by 1822 (Difference Engine 0). He announced his invention on 14 June 1822, in a paper to the Royal Astronomical Society, entitled "Note on the application of machinery to the computation of astronomical and mathematical tables". This machine used the decimal number system and was powered by cranking a handle. The British government was interested, since producing tables was time-consuming and expensive and they hoped the difference engine would make the task more economical.

In 1823, the British government gave Babbage £1700 to start work on the project. Although Babbage's design was feasible, the metalworking techniques of the era could not economically make parts in the precision and quantity required. Thus the implementation proved to be much more expensive and doubtful of success than the government's initial estimate. According to the 1830 design for Difference Engine No. 1, it would have about 25,000 parts, weigh 4 tons, and operate on 20-digit numbers by sixth-order differences. In 1832, Babbage and Joseph Clement produced a small working model (one-seventh of the plan), which operated on 6-digit numbers by second-order differences. Lady Byron described seeing the working prototype in 1833: "We both went to see the thinking machine (or so it seems) last Monday. It raised several Nos. to the 2nd and 3rd powers, and extracted the root of a Quadratic equation." Work on the larger engine was suspended in 1833.

By the time the government abandoned the project in 1842, Babbage had received and spent over £17,000 on development, which still fell short of achieving a working engine. The government valued only the machine's output (economically produced tables), not the development (at unpredictable cost) of the machine itself. Babbage refused to recognize that predicament. Meanwhile, Babbage's attention had moved on to developing an analytical engine, further undermining the government's confidence in the eventual success of the difference engine. By improving the concept as an analytical engine, Babbage had made the difference engine concept obsolete, and the project to implement it an utter failure in the view of the government.

The incomplete Difference Engine No. 1 was put on display to the public at the 1862 International Exhibition in South Kensington, London.

Babbage went on to design his much more general analytical engine, but later produced an improved "Difference Engine No. 2" design (31-digit numbers and seventh-order differences), between 1846 and 1849. Babbage was able to take advantage of ideas developed for the analytical engine to make the new difference engine calculate more quickly while using fewer parts.

Scheutzian calculation engine

Inspired by Babbage's difference engine in 1834, Per Georg Scheutz built several experimental models. In 1837 his son Edward proposed to construct a working model in metal, and in 1840 finished the calculating part, capable of calculating series with 5-digit numbers and first-order differences, which was later extended to third-order (1842). In 1843, after adding the printing part, the model was completed.

In 1851, funded by the government, construction of the larger and improved (15-digit numbers and fourth-order differences) machine began, and finished in 1853. The machine was demonstrated at the World's Fair in Paris, 1855 and then sold in 1856 to the Dudley Observatory in Albany, New York. Delivered in 1857, it was the first printing calculator sold. In 1857 the British government ordered the next Scheutz's difference machine, which was built in 1859. It had the same basic construction as the previous one, weighing about 10 -Lcwt.

Others
Martin Wiberg improved Scheutz's construction (c. 1859, his machine has the same capacity as Scheutz's: 15-digit and fourth-order) but used his device only for producing and publishing printed tables (interest tables in 1860, and logarithmic tables in 1875).

Alfred Deacon of London in c. 1862 produced a small difference engine (20-digit numbers and third-order differences).

American George B. Grant started working on his calculating machine in 1869, unaware of the works of Babbage and Scheutz (Schentz). One year later (1870) he learned about difference engines and proceeded to design one himself, describing his construction in 1871. In 1874 the Boston Thursday Club raised a subscription for the construction of a large-scale model, which was built in 1876. It could be expanded to enhance precision and weighed about 2000 lb.

Christel Hamann built one machine (16-digit numbers and second-order differences) in 1909 for the "Tables of Bauschinger and Peters" ("Logarithmic-Trigonometrical Tables with eight decimal places"), which was first published in Leipzig in 1910. It weighed about 40 kg.

Burroughs Corporation in about 1912 built a machine for the Nautical Almanac Office which was used as a difference engine of second-order. It was later replaced in 1929 by a Burroughs Class 11 (13-digit numbers and second-order differences, or 11-digit numbers and [at least up to] fifth-order differences).

Alexander John Thompson about 1927 built integrating and differencing machine (13-digit numbers and fifth-order differences) for his table of logarithms "Logarithmetica britannica". This machine was composed of four modified Triumphator calculators.

Leslie Comrie in 1928 described how to use the Brunsviga-Dupla calculating machine as a difference engine of second-order (15-digit numbers). He also noted in 1931 that National Accounting Machine Class 3000 could be used as a difference engine of sixth-order.

Construction of two working No. 2 difference engines
During the 1980s, Allan G. Bromley, an associate professor at the University of Sydney, Australia, studied Babbage's original drawings for the Difference and Analytical Engines at the Science Museum library in London. This work led the Science Museum to construct a working calculating section of difference engine No. 2 from 1985 to 1991, under Doron Swade, the then Curator of Computing. This was to celebrate the 200th anniversary of Babbage's birth in 1991. In 2002, the printer which Babbage originally designed for the difference engine was also completed. The conversion of the original design drawings into drawings suitable for engineering manufacturers' use revealed some minor errors in Babbage's design (possibly introduced as a protection in case the plans were stolen), which had to be corrected. The difference engine and printer were constructed to tolerances achievable with 19th-century technology, resolving a long-standing debate as to whether Babbage's design could have worked using Georgian-era engineering methods. The machine contains 8,000 parts and weighs about 5 tons.

The printer's primary purpose is to produce stereotype plates for use in printing presses, which it does by pressing type into soft plaster to create a flong. Babbage intended that the Engine's results be conveyed directly to mass printing, having recognized that many errors in previous tables were not the result of human calculating mistakes but from slips in the manual typesetting process. The printer's paper output is mainly a means of checking the engine's performance.

In addition to funding the construction of the output mechanism for the Science Museum's difference engine, Nathan Myhrvold commissioned the construction of a second complete Difference Engine No. 2, which was on exhibit at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California from May 2008 to January 2016. It has since been transferred to Intellectual Ventures in Seattle where it is on display just outside the main lobby.

Operation

The difference engine consists of a number of columns, numbered from 1 to N. The machine is able to store one decimal number in each column. The machine can only add the value of a column n + 1 to column n to produce the new value of n. Column N can only store a constant, column 1 displays (and possibly prints) the value of the calculation on the current iteration.

The engine is programmed by setting initial values to the columns. Column 1 is set to the value of the polynomial at the start of computation. Column 2 is set to a value derived from the first and higher derivatives of the polynomial at the same value of X. Each of the columns from 3 to N is set to a value derived from the $$(n-1)$$ first and higher derivatives of the polynomial.

Timing
In the Babbage design, one iteration (i.e. one full set of addition and carry operations) happens for each rotation of the main shaft. Odd and even columns alternately perform an addition in one cycle. The sequence of operations for column $$n$$ is thus:
 * 1) Count up, receiving the value from column $$n+1$$ (Addition step)
 * 2) Perform carry propagation on the counted up value
 * 3) Count down to zero, adding to column $$n-1$$
 * 4) Reset the counted-down value to its original value

Steps 1,2,3,4 occur for every odd column, while steps 3,4,1,2 occur for every even column.

While Babbage's original design placed the crank directly on the main shaft, it was later realized that the force required to crank the machine would have been too great for a human to handle comfortably. Therefore, the two models that were built incorporate a 4:1 reduction gear at the crank, and four revolutions of the crank are required to perform one full cycle.

Steps
Each iteration creates a new result, and is accomplished in four steps corresponding to four complete turns of the handle shown at the far right in the picture below. The four steps are:
 * 1) All even numbered columns (2,4,6,8) are added to all odd numbered columns (1,3,5,7) simultaneously. An interior sweep arm turns each even column to cause whatever number is on each wheel to count down to zero. As a wheel turns to zero, it transfers its value to a sector gear located between the odd/even columns. These values are transferred to the odd column causing them to count up. Any odd column value that passes from "9" to "0" activates a carry lever.
 * 2) This is like Step 1, except it is odd columns (3,5,7) added to even columns (2,4,6), and column one has its values transferred by a sector gear to the print mechanism on the left end of the engine. Any even column value that passes from "9" to "0" activates a carry lever. The column 1 value, the result for the polynomial, is sent to the attached printer mechanism.
 * 3) This is like Step 2, but for doing carries on even columns, and returning odd columns to their original values.

Subtraction
The engine represents negative numbers as ten's complements. Subtraction amounts to addition of a negative number. This works in the same manner that modern computers perform subtraction, known as two's complement.

Method of differences
The principle of a difference engine is Newton's method of divided differences. If the initial value of a polynomial (and of its finite differences) is calculated by some means for some value of X, the difference engine can calculate any number of nearby values, using the method generally known as the method of finite differences. For example, consider the quadratic polynomial

 * $$p(x) = 2x^2 - 3x + 2 \,$$

with the goal of tabulating the values p(0), p(1), p(2), p(3), p(4), and so forth. The table below is constructed as follows: the second column contains the values of the polynomial, the third column contains the differences of the two left neighbors in the second column, and the fourth column contains the differences of the two neighbors in the third column:

The numbers in the third values-column are constant. In fact, by starting with any polynomial of degree n, the column number n + 1 will always be constant. This is the crucial fact behind the success of the method.

This table was built from left to right, but it is possible to continue building it from right to left down a diagonal in order to compute more values. To calculate p(5) use the values from the lowest diagonal. Start with the fourth column constant value of 4 and copy it down the column. Then continue the third column by adding 4 to 11 to get 15. Next continue the second column by taking its previous value, 22 and adding the 15 from the third column. Thus p(5) is 22 + 15 = 37. In order to compute p(6), we iterate the same algorithm on the p(5) values: take 4 from the fourth column, add that to the third column's value 15 to get 19, then add that to the second column's value 37 to get 56, which is p(6). This process may be continued ad infinitum. The values of the polynomial are produced without ever having to multiply. A difference engine only needs to be able to add. From one loop to the next, it needs to store 2 numbers—in this example (the last elements in the first and second columns). To tabulate polynomials of degree n, one needs sufficient storage to hold n numbers.

Babbage's difference engine No. 2, finally built in 1991, can hold 8 numbers of 31 decimal digits each and can thus tabulate 7th degree polynomials to that precision. The best machines from Scheutz could store 4 numbers with 15 digits each.

Initial values
The initial values of columns can be calculated by first manually calculating N consecutive values of the function and by backtracking (i.e. calculating the required differences).

Col $$1_0$$ gets the value of the function at the start of computation $$f(0)$$. Col $$2_0$$ is the difference between $$f(1)$$ and $$f(0)$$...

If the function to be calculated is a polynomial function, expressed as
 * $$ f(x) = a_n x^n + a_{n-1} x^{n-1} + \cdots + a_2 x^2 + a_1 x + a_0 \, $$

the initial values can be calculated directly from the constant coefficients a0, a1,a2, ..., an without calculating any data points. The initial values are thus:

 * Col $$1_0$$ = a0
 * Col $$2_0$$ = a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 + ... + an
 * Col $$3_0$$ = 2a2 + 6a3 + 14a4 + 30a5 + ...
 * Col $$4_0$$ = 6a3 + 36a4 + 150a5 + ...
 * Col $$5_0$$ = 24a4 + 240a5 + ...
 * Col $$6_0$$ = 120a5 + ...

Use of derivatives
Many commonly used functions are analytic functions, which can be expressed as power series, for example as a Taylor series. The initial values can be calculated to any degree of accuracy; if done correctly the engine will give exact results for first N steps. After that, the engine will only give an approximation of the function.

The Taylor series expresses the function as a sum obtained from its derivatives at one point. For many functions the higher derivatives are trivial to obtain; for instance, the sine function at 0 has values of 0 or $$\pm1$$ for all derivatives. Setting 0 as the start of computation we get the simplified Maclaurin series

\sum_{n=0}^{\infin} \frac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!}\ x^{n} $$

The same method of calculating the initial values from the coefficients can be used as for polynomial functions. The polynomial constant coefficients will now have the value

a_n \equiv \frac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!} $$

Curve fitting
The problem with the methods described above is that errors will accumulate and the series will tend to diverge from the true function. A solution which guarantees a constant maximum error is to use curve fitting. A minimum of N values are calculated evenly spaced along the range of the desired calculations. Using a curve fitting technique like Gaussian reduction an N−1th degree polynomial interpolation of the function is found. With the optimized polynomial, the initial values can be calculated as above.

title: Difference engine