Talk:Elizabethan era/Archive 1

Archive 1

Festivals etc..

• The material on traditional festivals isn't sourced, and I wonder if it should be moved to a more general article on traditional festivals of pre-industrial England?

I'm editing it to make it more consistent with Wiki style, but I also vote to move it. Seems an odd fit here. Egthegreat 20:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

These festivities weren't specifically Elizabethan (except for the Accession Day celebrations of course!).

See the various works of Ronald Hutton (especially The Rise and Fall of Merry England and The Stations of the Sun) for even-handed general discussions of English folk-customs in the light of recent scholarship. - PKM 20:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you not add these book to the "reference" section? You seem to have the details of these books. It would be appreciated. Dieter Simon 00:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll put them in as further reading - "reference" suggests (to me) that the books support what's said above, and I am dubious about some of it. - PKM 02:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

what about weapons..?

Weapons in festivals? Or do you mean a seperate topic? Watersoftheoasis 20:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this proposition except with reference to festivals that are particular to this era. Those should be left here in addition to being added to the new article I would think.Dougjaso (talk) 09:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)dougjaso

Semiprot?

I'm starting to wonder is semi-protection should be requested for this article. It seems relatively besieged with vandals. Thoughts? Vassyana 02:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree. Yes, please. - PKM 03:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I've put in a request for semi-prot at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection. Vassyana 14:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

British spelling?

What is the general opinion among Wikipedians re British spelling in an arch-English subject such as this? We have centralized, well-organized and even English colonization in this article. Should that not be changed to centralised, well-organised and colonisation? After all, any British spellings in an article about the United States would be changed in next to no time, wouldn't it? Dieter Simon 02:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I would support British spelling in this article; would you want to make the changes? - PKM 18:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC) (a Californian)

I would support it as well. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 18:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English

If there is a strong tie to a specific region/dialect, use that dialect.

I definitely support it, in light of the wiki standards. The undertow 23:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Have changed back to the British spellings. Dieter Simon 01:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Elizabethan era as opposed to Elizabethan times

Hi Chutem, please do not keep moving article to "Elizabethan times", saying readers are more likely to look for "Elizabethan times" than they are for "Elizabethan era". That is already taken care of as you would notice if you searched for "E.t.". It would automatically direct you to "E.e", and you couldn't miss it. Dieter Simon 22:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Rearranging images

I have added the Armada portrait to be the lead image, as it sums up the "Golden Age" myth quite nicely without a caption. The allegory with mythological "peace & plenty" may not be obvious to modern readers without the caption. - PKM 03:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation

This edit deleted as WP:COPYVIO. It's from "Britain Express" and claimed to be copyright. --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge Elizabethan leisure

WHY, WHY , WHY? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.175.103.217 (talk) 14:52, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I recommend that we merge Elizabethan leisure into the appropriate section of this article, and replace the unreferenced and unencyclopedic lists on both pages with narrative paragraphs, properly sourced from high-quality written secondary sources. Any disagreement? - PKM (talk) 17:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Elizabethan dance

I notice there's no mention of the topic of Elizabethan dance. See this excellent site for information that can be used to expand this article. http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/elizabethan-dance.htm -- œ^™ 01:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Economy, Society?

We have sports, dance, etc., but nothing on the society or economy of this era... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.174.211 (talk) 22:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2013

In third paragraph of main description section, it would probably be better to word the sentence because it sounds better this way: "The Elizabethan Age is viewed so highly largely because of the periods before and after." rather than "The Elizabethan Age is viewed so highly because of the periods before and after." basically just removing the absilution of the reason behind the praise of the era. 108.213.28.156 (talk) 22:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'll buy that. Done. Thanks! --ElHef (Meep?) 02:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2015

Typo in the third paragraph. "The Elizabethan Age may be viewed especially highly when considered in light of the failings of the periods prceeeding Elizabeth's reign..." Drake lazarus (talk) 11:44, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Done Nice catch Cannolis (talk) 12:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

C vs. B class

The present state of this article seems to me to be a "B" class article. Is there any reason not to promote it to B class? It is well-written, covers almost all of the possible material, & is well-referenced. Otherwise, the only omission I can find is one that might escape all but the specialist: no mention of the "Great Rebuilding", a period in English history when the houses of the average inhabitant, i.e. most people, massively improved. Houses gained rooms, a second floor, chimneys & fireplaces -- previously, the hearth was an open fire that sent its smoke out thru a hole in the roof -- & the windows were glazed. The person who uncovered this otherwise undocumented revolution was W.G. Hoskins, & his books provide evidence for its changes. But adding that would only make this article closer to GA status, IMHO. -- llywrch (talk) 22:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Elizabethan era. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100510202040/http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/Homework/houses/tudor.htm to http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/Homework/houses/tudor.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081122075943/http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/TUDpoverty.htm to http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/TUDpoverty.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100618131251/http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/homework/tudors/schools.htm to http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/Homework/tudors/schools.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:09, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elizabethan era. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100618130140/http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/homework/tudors/entertainment.html to http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/Homework/tudors/entertainment.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:05, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Towerson

The exploits of Towerson and Lok might be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.216.95.91 (talk) 17:22, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Question about Homes and dwelling sentence

Hello, I am a newcomer to this so be gentle. There is a part of a sentence under 'Homes and dwelling' that seems to contradict itself. 'and the wood was painted with black tar to prevent rotting, but not in Tudor times; the Victorians did this afterwards.'

Was this done in Tudor times or in Victorian times? Thank you Mov326 (talk) 07:14, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Elizabethan Ireland

I think this article needs a section on Ireland. Inchiquin (talk) 12:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Daily Elizabethan Food Consumption for the Lower Classes The food eaten daily by the average Lower Class Elizabethan consisted of at least ½ lb. bread, 1 pint of beer, 1 pint of porridge, and 1/4 lb of meat. This would have been supplemented with some dairy products - vegetables were a substantial ingredient of soups. Records show that the daily ration of a food for a Tudor soldier with 2 lb. of beef or mutton with l lb. cheese, l/2 lb. butter, 1.5 lb. bread and 2/3 gallon of beer! It is probably worth pointing out that the the beer had a very low alcohol content!

Are there any citations for this information?Dougjaso (talk) 09:27, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I dunno, maybe? Sopup1 (talk) 05:47, 3 march 2017 (UTC)

End of eras

Per the block at the right that lists the eras, what happens after the Edwardian era? It just ends? If you actually go the Edwardian era article, it has the block at the right which says it's followed by "World War I" which takes you to History of the United Kingdom during World War I. THAT one has a block at right which says it's followed by "Interwar period" which isn't about England specifically, and doesn't have a block at all so no idea what comes after that.

Basically the continuity starts to fall apart here and ends completely two articles later in the sequence, at Interwar period. I'm not sure how to fix this, perhaps someone more expert in the period could do so? Or is the history of the UK no longer defined in "eras" after that point? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookgrrl (talk • contribs) 20:10, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Elizabethan Era Literature

For some reason, there is no section in this article that deals with Elizabethan era literature. I realize there is an entirely different page dedicated to Elizabethan era literature entitled "Elizabethan Literature." However, for purposes of both comprehensiveness and convenience, I would include a new section entitled "Literature" with a link to the "Elizabethan Literature" page. If I had to hazard a guess, I would bet that at least 40% of the visitors to this page are looking for Elizabethan era literature as I was when I came here. It took me 10-15 minutes to realize that the literature of the era was included in a completely different page as there are no obvious links to that page on this page. Perhaps I'm dense. Probably so. However, I think there are some people out there as dense as I and the energy it would take to create this section with but a link could not be too taxing. Thank you for your consideration. Dougjaso (talk) 08:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Famous For?!?!?!

I mean, what is the point of telling about the Elizabethan Era if there is only a small paragraph about what it was famous for. And when I say 'small' I mean SMALL. That is all I have to say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.47.29.214 (talk) 23:10, 16 May 2017 (UTC)