![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
"Bonfire Night was celebrated in Australia until the mid-to-late 1970s, when sale and public use of fireworks was made illegal and the celebration was effectively abolished." This can't be right. I was born in '78, and distinctly remember celebrating "bonfire night" on the 5th Nov. (with fireworks) in N.S.W. throughout the early Eighties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.48.200 ( talk) 07:01, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
What is this lengthy section for? Why isn't it referenced? Do we really need it? -- John ( talk) 16:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
The recent vandalism on this page has led me to think whether the (over?) use of the word "celebration" in the article is actually correct, and perhaps a source of the problem. In no way do the overwhelming majority of people taking part in "Guy Fawkes Night" in the UK see it as a "celebration" of an event that happened over 300 years ago. Participants see it as an opportunity to have a party, fireworks, bonfire etc. for no particular reason - simply because it is fun. Historically, the lighting of fires and so on at about this time of year goes back to pre-Christian times; and, also, the burning of a "guy" itself is a practice that has largely died out in many areas. The modern event, therefore, has next to nothing to do with 17th-century religious politics. It occurs to me that the current wording of the article, by placing emphasis on the words "celebration" and on the Gunpowder Plot itself as a historical basis for the modern event, gives an unbalanced picture of what actually happens now in the UK. I'm certainly not suggesting that the Plot itself should be ignored in the article, simply that a more balanced picture be given. Views? Ghmyrtle ( talk) 10:39, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
No-one is denying anything about what happened in 1605, the establishment of a public holiday, and so forth. What I dispute is your insistence, against many sources, that there is "no connection" between the practice of celebrating the holiday - with bonfires, and fires and fireworks generally - and earlier celebrations at about (and perhaps exactly given the calendar changes - Nov 5 being exactly the midpoint between the two equinoxes) the same time as the Samhain celebrations, which also centred on fires as a focus of celebration. "Guy Fawkes Night" was, undoubtedly, a specific celebration of the 1605 events. (It somewhat begs the question of why, specifically, bonfires were chosen as the mode of celebrating it.) But, this article is not only about the celebrations of 1605 - it is also a redirect from "Bonfire Night", and no article about "Bonfire Night" as it is now celebrated has any reason to ignore the links between the celebrations which are set out in reliable (as well as less reliable) sources. It seems to me that in your concentration on the events of the 17th century, important as they are, you may be missing the bigger picture. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 20:06, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps one of the more popular modern reasons for Guy Fawkes' Day celebrations is because of its significance in the movie V for Vendetta. I'm amazed that this isn't mentioned on this page? Can somebody add that? Sir Ian ( talk) 16:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
"The present-day Guy Fawkes Night is usually celebrated at large organised events, centred on a bonfire and extravagant firework displays.". Not true at least in the UK, it is mostly celebrated by families with children letting off fireworks in their back gardens after dark. If they are lucky they also have a bonfire and outdoor food such as roast potatoes etc. Having lived in the suburbs most of my life, it has always been like WW3 on Bonfire Night as all the families around let off fireworks. Organised displays do occur, but I still think that more people take part in their own family letting off of fireworks. Perhaps some statistics on firework sales could be found. The past religious significance has been forgotten by everyone except historians. 2.97.212.235 ( talk) 15:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I added some information about Guy Fawkes being celebrated (albeit less so these days) in Australia and New Zealand as the topic is called 'other countries' and yet is limited to only the USA. However, it was deleted as 'trivia'. Surely it's worth mentioning those countries that do celebrate it, even if in just a sentence? [EDIT: I notice that it's briefly mentioned in the lede, but 'some Commonwealth countries' is still vague given it can include India!] Vickytnz ( talk) 14:18, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
The article should have a comprehensive section on 21st century practices. At the moment its is too narrowly focused the history of the event in England. -- PBS ( talk) 01:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
As "Guy Fawkes", certainly Britan gets the most WP:DUE since it is a British historical event. However, as the customary traditions are a subset of other more general "bonfire nights" etc, some minor links over there should be allowed. "In other countries" should only have content here as specifically related to Guy Fawkes, other similar celebrations unrelated to Guy Fawkes should be in the bonfire nights article or somewhere else. Gaijin42 ( talk) 16:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps those who believe that consensus has been consistently achieved on various issues, such as what goes in 'other countries', could work on a [ FAQ] for the Talk page as a guide to editors on this article? AnonNep ( talk) 22:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Why did 'Parrot of Doom' edit my addition of a simple fact stating that Guy Fawkes Night is also celebrated in New Zealand, South Africa, and Newfoundland? It seems this user has done this in the past, and must have some underlying reasons for not wanting any other country mentioned in this section except for the USA. How can we report this unnecessary removal of legitimate additions to Wikipedia so this user can be prevented from destroying the work of others? Chuckeee ( talk) 02:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Another comparison: Halloween#Around_the_world has newspaper references to show that other countries in the world celebrate the event. The point of the reference is to show that the event is observed in the country or not, and while a national newspaper may not be high scholarship, unless a columnist wrote the article, it's been through an editorial vetting process. No, it may not be enough to write at length about it, but certainly enough to show which countries know what it is and what it means. Vickytnz ( talk) 22:30, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
"As such, featured articles should be the first place to start when defending article quality. We should look for bad edits on all articles, and use featured article status as a guiding light to where we should look; however, no one is advocating that edits to featured articles be reverted, or that featured articles be protected. This proposal will merely suggest guidelines for assertively patrolling featured articles and examining new edits with a critical eye." From reading what is said about these articles, obviously politically contentious points will get deleted, but not that mere 'trivia' will get deleted. If you like, I could try and make a new article on Guy Fawkes in non-UK countries… but I suspect that the call will be for the information to be included on this page! Vickytnz ( talk) 23:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
But all the contributors over the years have been attempting to get one or two sentences in showing that the Guy Fawkes' night is celebrated in particular other countries—a fact that surprised most British people—and have years and years of national newspapers, council announcements (including temporary permits to sell/let off fireworks domestically as it's usually illegal) and significant attendance figures for fireworks displays on the night to prove that it is the case. They're not saying it's significant, but it is celebrated to the point that regional councils put on fireworks for them. They don't do it for the US Fourth of July. It is directly related to this event (unlike, say, the difference between Mothering Sunday and Mother's Day (United States). Our Kingdom for a paragraph!
Given that this is an official event, shouldn't this have an infobox? This might also get around some of the issues relating to countries and related pages, as it includes the countries it's commemorated in and also related events. Vickytnz ( talk) 18:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Oppose – I am completely against the addition of an infobox on this article. -- Cassianto Talk 20:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Presently, the article starts with Guy Fawkes, then blunders into an almost entirely different idea of Pope Day in other countries, based only on the similarity of the time and of some of the celebrations. I think this is a mistake. To illustrate the fluidity of such traditions, consider that the American Thanksgiving was once celebrated with masks and costumes, and Guy Fawkes Night linked with Mischief Night, both of which have since been migrated to Halloween here. My feeling is that the article should limit itself to celebrations where the memory of Guy Fawkes specifically is invoked.
I'm thinking the article needs to relate Guy Fawkes Night to Thanksgiving in general, as it was just one of many reasons given to hold such days. (Victory over the Spanish Armada, advances in the U.S. Civil War, etc.) Pope Day is presumably another such case, even more explicitly rooted in Puritan sentiments. It would stand to reason that Thanksgiving should be the "main topic" in some sense, with Guy Fawkes Night being one specific instance, and Pope Day another, i.e. splitting the present article in two.
A consequence of this would be that this article would have more room to review celebrations of Guy Fawkes Night sensu stricto in all Commonwealth countries as suggested at #Why is 'other countries' only allowed to include the US? above. Wnt ( talk) 16:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Bonfire Night is celebrated in the Canadian province of Newfoundland & Labrador, particularly on the island. This should have some mention in the article. -- Bentonia School ( talk) 16:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request the following note be placed after the first mention of 5 November:
<ref group=nb>England and the British colonies in America changed from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar in 1752; Wednesday 2 September 1752 was followed by Thursday 14 September 1752. Guy Fawkes Night has been observed on 5 November whichever calendar was in effect. Dates in the article are stated in the calendar that was in effect at the time of the event, but for purposes of the article the year is always considered to begin 1 January even though the year was considered to begin 1 March in England and the colonies before 1752.</ref>
Although this entire thread seems pedantic, all the OP is asking for is a note, which I am confused as to how this could be objectionable. Particularly the issue about the passing of the observance of the 5th of November act, where the date is part of the act name (or at least our article), and there is an obvious discrepancy. Gaijin42 ( talk) 21:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Agree that some kind of note is necessary. The article currently says that "the Observance of 5th November Act 1605 was passed in January 1606," and that certainly requires clarification (it's even more important that the Observance of 5th November Act 1605 article contain a note, of course). -- 101.119.14.238 ( talk) 23:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
23:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Holiday's often have three aspects: legal, religious, and traditional informal celebrations. This is somewhat analogous to the three aspects of a wedding: registering the marriage with the civil authorities, a religious ceremony in a house of worship, and the reception with wedding cake, champagne, dancing, etc. These three aspects are often separable. Today all that survives of this holiday is the third aspect, the informal celebrations. However, for most of it's history it was a legal public holiday and a red-letter day in the church calendar. In the 17th century and well into the 18th, that would have meant compulsory church attendance, typically at 8:30 AM as on a Sunday, then something like regular Sunday services except for the topic of the sermon, and with extra prayers at the end. For the rest of the day, Sunday blue laws would have applied. No work, no public entertainments (the racetrack and theatre were closed) and no outdoor recreations such as stool-ball (an early form of cricket).
As soon the Thanksgiving Act was passed, Robert Barker (the same person who printed and published the King James Bible) printed up a supplement to the Book of Common Prayer entitled, PRAYERS AND THANKSGIVING, for the happy deliverance of his Majestie, the Queene, Prince, and States of Parliament from the bloody intended Massacre by Gunpowder, 5 November, 1605. These supplement were available in two typefaces, Roman and black letter, and in a range of sizes: folio, quarto, octavo, etc., all the way down to 64mo. In those days the Book of Common prayer as a whole was only revised infrequently, 1552 (Queen Elizabeth edition), 1559 (re-issue of 1552 edition), 1604 (Hampton Court revision). The next one after that was 1662. As a result, supplements were taken very seriously. When they were received, they along with the book were usually take to a bookbinder so that the supplement could be made part of the book, usually at the end. Churches, even small ones, were regularly inspected to make sure they had all the necessary paperwork: a Bible, a Book of Common Prayer with all the supplements, a psalter, etc. If it wasn't all there, the church could be shut down and have its credentials revoked.
In England, Gun-Powder Day (as it was known in the early 17th century) was the most popular holiday for Puritans, and usually their only annual holiday. In New England things were complicated. The Pilgrim separatists of the Plymouth Colony eschewed all annual holidays as "dead ritual." In the Massachusetts Bay Colony some holidays were observed in the early days (Christmas, St. Valentine's Day, etc.) but later in the 1630s the stricter sort of Puritans launched a War on Christmas that swept up all other annual holidays. In 1688 the ban was lifted, only to be put in force again in 1692. However, Gun-Powder-Treason Day (as it was known after 1662) was exempt and continued to be observed until the outbreak of the American Revolution.
In Virginia I'm still trying to find out if it was observed at Jamestown (or Fort James) in 1607. Theoretically it should have been, since the Virginia Company was very particular about making sure that the forms were observed, including red-letter days. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 15:44, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
For the last few weeks, I've been researching the various names by which this holiday has been known. It never had an official name, at least not de jure, as the Thanksgiving Act and the Book of Common Prayer only describe it in terms of what sort of holiday it was, when it was to be observed, for what purpose, etc. However, it had something approaching a de facto official name: Gunpowder Treason Day. It is first attested in 1611-12 as "daie of the Gunpowder treasonn." This name stuck, not only in England, but throughout the world, wherever English was spoken, up to the time the holiday became defunct in 1859, except in the United States, where the name went out of fashion with the outbreak of the American Revolution, when the holiday ceased to be observed here. "The fifth of November" was used with considerable frequency as well.
The after-dark festivities, on the other hand, had names of their own, possibly because they were never actually part of the holiday. The relationship between the two was something like the relationship between Ash Wednesday and Mardi Gras: Gunpowder Treason Day was when people went to church in the morning and prayed, then spent the rest of the day in quiet contemplation, staying home with family. Once the sun set below the horizon, the holiday was over and all hell broke loose. At that point it became Bonfire Night.
"Guy Faux day" is first attested in 1819, "Guy Vaux day" in 1820, Guy Fawkes Day in 1825, and Guy Fawkes Night in 1835.
Then there's "Pope's Day" and its variants, Pope Day and Pope Night.
Pope Day began in the port towns of Massachusetts in the 1730s, when visiting sailors, for the first time in the history of New England, were permitted to celebrate the after-dark festivities. Local children soon joined in on the fun and took to calling it Pope Day. In the mid-1760s, youth gangs in Boston recruited by wealthy political organizations (anti-Stamp Act Patriots) began holding impressive Pope Night or Pope Day festivities. There is no indication that any of these "pope" names were ever widely adopted outside of the small circles of children and youths in the port districts.
In England Pope Day turns up in the late 18th- and early 19th century, first in the context of children's speech, later in reference to juvenile delinquents. For example, "Pope Day" might occur in a political speech where the speaker is suggesting that his opponent is the sort of person who would called it Pope Day.
In 1835, Nathaniel Hawthorne published a story called "Old News" in The New-England Magazine - Volume 8:
Here is a volume of what were once newspapers each on a small half sheet yellow and time stained of a coarse fabric and imprinted with a rude old type Their aspect conveys a....
Governor Belcher makes proclamation against certain 'loose and dissolute people,' who have been wont to stop passengers in the streets, on the Fifth of November, 'otherwise called Pope's Day,' and levy contributions for the building of bonfires. In this instance, the populace are more puritanic than the magistrate.
This is the first occurrence of Pope's Day with an "apostrophe ess." Belcher was governor of Massachusetts from 1730 to 1741, but never issued any such proclamation, as Hawthorne's is a work of fiction.
Although published anonymously, it is later reprinting in various collections of short stories such as "The Snow-Image, and Other Twice-Told Tales." The following year, 1836, the diary of a prominent colonial-era New Englander is published, edited by his son. Although the author's text nowhere mentions "Pope's Day," the editor liberally sprinkles the book with "Pope's Day" in the footnotes, commentary, and chapter titles.
During the 19th century, "Pope Day" (without the s) turns up a few times, in the 1820s, and again in the 1850s. Then in the 1880s several books on the history of Catholics in US repeatedly use the term Pope Day.
The in 1894, Alice Morse Earle, in her book, "Customs and Fashions in Old New England" revives "Pope's Day" with an S, quoting Nathaniel Hawthorne without attribution and treating his short story as history. This sets off an avalanche of other books on the history of New England, the history of Holidays, and the history of holidays in New England, all using the term Pope's Day as if that had been what New Englanders called it.
Unfortunately, I learned all this by examining hundreds of primary sources, but can't find much in the way of reliable secondary sources that we can use a references. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 03:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
For the last few weeks, I've been researching the various names by which this holiday has been known. It never had an official name, at least not de jure, as the Thanksgiving Act and the Book of Common Prayer only describe it in terms of what sort of holiday it was, when it was to be observed, for what purpose, etc. However, it had something approaching a de facto official name: Gunpowder Treason Day. It is first attested in 1611-12 as "daie of the Gunpowder treasonn." This name stuck, not only in England, but throughout the world, wherever English was spoken, up to the time the holiday became defunct in 1859, except in the United States, where the name went out of fashion with the outbreak of the American Revolution, when the holiday ceased to be observed here. "The fifth of November" was used with considerable frequency as well.
The after-dark festivities, on the other hand, had names of their own, possibly because they were never actually part of the holiday. The relationship between the two was something like the relationship between Ash Wednesday and Mardi Gras: Gunpowder Treason Day was when people went to church in the morning and prayed, then spent the rest of the day in quiet contemplation, staying home with family. Once the sun set below the horizon, the holiday was over and all hell broke loose. At that point it became Bonfire Night.
"Guy Faux day" is first attested in 1819, "Guy Vaux day" in 1820, Guy Fawkes Day in 1825, and Guy Fawkes Night in 1835.
Then there's "Pope's Day" and its variants, Pope Day and Pope Night.
Pope Day began in the port towns of Massachusetts in the 1730s, when visiting sailors, for the first time in the history of New England, were permitted to celebrate the after-dark festivities. Local children soon joined in on the fun and took to calling it Pope Day. In the mid-1760s, youth gangs in Boston recruited by wealthy political organizations (anti-Stamp Act Patriots) began holding impressive Pope Night or Pope Day festivities. There is no indication that any of these "pope" names were ever widely adopted outside of the small circles of children and youths in the port districts.
In England Pope Day turns up in the late 18th- and early 19th century, first in the context of children's speech, later in reference to juvenile delinquents. For example, "Pope Day" might occur in a political speech where the speaker is suggesting that his opponent is the sort of person who would called it Pope Day.
In 1835, Nathaniel Hawthorne published a story called "Old News" in The New-England Magazine - Volume 8:
Here is a volume of what were once newspapers each on a small half sheet yellow and time stained of a coarse fabric and imprinted with a rude old type Their aspect conveys a....
Governor Belcher makes proclamation against certain 'loose and dissolute people,' who have been wont to stop passengers in the streets, on the Fifth of November, 'otherwise called Pope's Day,' and levy contributions for the building of bonfires. In this instance, the populace are more puritanic than the magistrate.
This is the first occurrence of Pope's Day with an "apostrophe ess." Belcher was governor of Massachusetts from 1730 to 1741, but never issued any such proclamation, as Hawthorne's is a work of fiction.
Although published anonymously, it is later reprinting in various collections of short stories such as "The Snow-Image, and Other Twice-Told Tales." The following year, 1836, the diary of a prominent colonial-era New Englander is published, edited by his son. Although the author's text nowhere mentions "Pope's Day," the editor liberally sprinkles the book with "Pope's Day" in the footnotes, commentary, and chapter titles.
During the 19th century, "Pope Day" (without the s) turns up a few times, in the 1820s, and again in the 1850s. Then in the 1880s several books on the history of Catholics in US repeatedly use the term Pope Day.
The in 1894, Alice Morse Earle, in her book, "Customs and Fashions in Old New England" revives "Pope's Day" with an S, quoting Nathaniel Hawthorne without attribution and treating his short story as history. This sets off an avalanche of other books on the history of New England, the history of Holidays, and the history of holidays in New England, all using the term Pope's Day as if that had been what New Englanders called it.
Unfortunately, I learned all this by examining hundreds of primary sources, but can't find much in the way of reliable secondary sources that we can use a references. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 03:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
"Bonfire Night was celebrated in Australia until the mid-to-late 1970s, when sale and public use of fireworks was made illegal and the celebration was effectively abolished." This can't be right. I was born in '78, and distinctly remember celebrating "bonfire night" on the 5th Nov. (with fireworks) in N.S.W. throughout the early Eighties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.48.200 ( talk) 07:01, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
What is this lengthy section for? Why isn't it referenced? Do we really need it? -- John ( talk) 16:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
The recent vandalism on this page has led me to think whether the (over?) use of the word "celebration" in the article is actually correct, and perhaps a source of the problem. In no way do the overwhelming majority of people taking part in "Guy Fawkes Night" in the UK see it as a "celebration" of an event that happened over 300 years ago. Participants see it as an opportunity to have a party, fireworks, bonfire etc. for no particular reason - simply because it is fun. Historically, the lighting of fires and so on at about this time of year goes back to pre-Christian times; and, also, the burning of a "guy" itself is a practice that has largely died out in many areas. The modern event, therefore, has next to nothing to do with 17th-century religious politics. It occurs to me that the current wording of the article, by placing emphasis on the words "celebration" and on the Gunpowder Plot itself as a historical basis for the modern event, gives an unbalanced picture of what actually happens now in the UK. I'm certainly not suggesting that the Plot itself should be ignored in the article, simply that a more balanced picture be given. Views? Ghmyrtle ( talk) 10:39, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
No-one is denying anything about what happened in 1605, the establishment of a public holiday, and so forth. What I dispute is your insistence, against many sources, that there is "no connection" between the practice of celebrating the holiday - with bonfires, and fires and fireworks generally - and earlier celebrations at about (and perhaps exactly given the calendar changes - Nov 5 being exactly the midpoint between the two equinoxes) the same time as the Samhain celebrations, which also centred on fires as a focus of celebration. "Guy Fawkes Night" was, undoubtedly, a specific celebration of the 1605 events. (It somewhat begs the question of why, specifically, bonfires were chosen as the mode of celebrating it.) But, this article is not only about the celebrations of 1605 - it is also a redirect from "Bonfire Night", and no article about "Bonfire Night" as it is now celebrated has any reason to ignore the links between the celebrations which are set out in reliable (as well as less reliable) sources. It seems to me that in your concentration on the events of the 17th century, important as they are, you may be missing the bigger picture. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 20:06, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps one of the more popular modern reasons for Guy Fawkes' Day celebrations is because of its significance in the movie V for Vendetta. I'm amazed that this isn't mentioned on this page? Can somebody add that? Sir Ian ( talk) 16:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
"The present-day Guy Fawkes Night is usually celebrated at large organised events, centred on a bonfire and extravagant firework displays.". Not true at least in the UK, it is mostly celebrated by families with children letting off fireworks in their back gardens after dark. If they are lucky they also have a bonfire and outdoor food such as roast potatoes etc. Having lived in the suburbs most of my life, it has always been like WW3 on Bonfire Night as all the families around let off fireworks. Organised displays do occur, but I still think that more people take part in their own family letting off of fireworks. Perhaps some statistics on firework sales could be found. The past religious significance has been forgotten by everyone except historians. 2.97.212.235 ( talk) 15:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
I added some information about Guy Fawkes being celebrated (albeit less so these days) in Australia and New Zealand as the topic is called 'other countries' and yet is limited to only the USA. However, it was deleted as 'trivia'. Surely it's worth mentioning those countries that do celebrate it, even if in just a sentence? [EDIT: I notice that it's briefly mentioned in the lede, but 'some Commonwealth countries' is still vague given it can include India!] Vickytnz ( talk) 14:18, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
The article should have a comprehensive section on 21st century practices. At the moment its is too narrowly focused the history of the event in England. -- PBS ( talk) 01:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
As "Guy Fawkes", certainly Britan gets the most WP:DUE since it is a British historical event. However, as the customary traditions are a subset of other more general "bonfire nights" etc, some minor links over there should be allowed. "In other countries" should only have content here as specifically related to Guy Fawkes, other similar celebrations unrelated to Guy Fawkes should be in the bonfire nights article or somewhere else. Gaijin42 ( talk) 16:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps those who believe that consensus has been consistently achieved on various issues, such as what goes in 'other countries', could work on a [ FAQ] for the Talk page as a guide to editors on this article? AnonNep ( talk) 22:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Why did 'Parrot of Doom' edit my addition of a simple fact stating that Guy Fawkes Night is also celebrated in New Zealand, South Africa, and Newfoundland? It seems this user has done this in the past, and must have some underlying reasons for not wanting any other country mentioned in this section except for the USA. How can we report this unnecessary removal of legitimate additions to Wikipedia so this user can be prevented from destroying the work of others? Chuckeee ( talk) 02:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Another comparison: Halloween#Around_the_world has newspaper references to show that other countries in the world celebrate the event. The point of the reference is to show that the event is observed in the country or not, and while a national newspaper may not be high scholarship, unless a columnist wrote the article, it's been through an editorial vetting process. No, it may not be enough to write at length about it, but certainly enough to show which countries know what it is and what it means. Vickytnz ( talk) 22:30, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
"As such, featured articles should be the first place to start when defending article quality. We should look for bad edits on all articles, and use featured article status as a guiding light to where we should look; however, no one is advocating that edits to featured articles be reverted, or that featured articles be protected. This proposal will merely suggest guidelines for assertively patrolling featured articles and examining new edits with a critical eye." From reading what is said about these articles, obviously politically contentious points will get deleted, but not that mere 'trivia' will get deleted. If you like, I could try and make a new article on Guy Fawkes in non-UK countries… but I suspect that the call will be for the information to be included on this page! Vickytnz ( talk) 23:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
But all the contributors over the years have been attempting to get one or two sentences in showing that the Guy Fawkes' night is celebrated in particular other countries—a fact that surprised most British people—and have years and years of national newspapers, council announcements (including temporary permits to sell/let off fireworks domestically as it's usually illegal) and significant attendance figures for fireworks displays on the night to prove that it is the case. They're not saying it's significant, but it is celebrated to the point that regional councils put on fireworks for them. They don't do it for the US Fourth of July. It is directly related to this event (unlike, say, the difference between Mothering Sunday and Mother's Day (United States). Our Kingdom for a paragraph!
Given that this is an official event, shouldn't this have an infobox? This might also get around some of the issues relating to countries and related pages, as it includes the countries it's commemorated in and also related events. Vickytnz ( talk) 18:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Oppose – I am completely against the addition of an infobox on this article. -- Cassianto Talk 20:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Presently, the article starts with Guy Fawkes, then blunders into an almost entirely different idea of Pope Day in other countries, based only on the similarity of the time and of some of the celebrations. I think this is a mistake. To illustrate the fluidity of such traditions, consider that the American Thanksgiving was once celebrated with masks and costumes, and Guy Fawkes Night linked with Mischief Night, both of which have since been migrated to Halloween here. My feeling is that the article should limit itself to celebrations where the memory of Guy Fawkes specifically is invoked.
I'm thinking the article needs to relate Guy Fawkes Night to Thanksgiving in general, as it was just one of many reasons given to hold such days. (Victory over the Spanish Armada, advances in the U.S. Civil War, etc.) Pope Day is presumably another such case, even more explicitly rooted in Puritan sentiments. It would stand to reason that Thanksgiving should be the "main topic" in some sense, with Guy Fawkes Night being one specific instance, and Pope Day another, i.e. splitting the present article in two.
A consequence of this would be that this article would have more room to review celebrations of Guy Fawkes Night sensu stricto in all Commonwealth countries as suggested at #Why is 'other countries' only allowed to include the US? above. Wnt ( talk) 16:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Bonfire Night is celebrated in the Canadian province of Newfoundland & Labrador, particularly on the island. This should have some mention in the article. -- Bentonia School ( talk) 16:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I request the following note be placed after the first mention of 5 November:
<ref group=nb>England and the British colonies in America changed from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar in 1752; Wednesday 2 September 1752 was followed by Thursday 14 September 1752. Guy Fawkes Night has been observed on 5 November whichever calendar was in effect. Dates in the article are stated in the calendar that was in effect at the time of the event, but for purposes of the article the year is always considered to begin 1 January even though the year was considered to begin 1 March in England and the colonies before 1752.</ref>
Although this entire thread seems pedantic, all the OP is asking for is a note, which I am confused as to how this could be objectionable. Particularly the issue about the passing of the observance of the 5th of November act, where the date is part of the act name (or at least our article), and there is an obvious discrepancy. Gaijin42 ( talk) 21:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Agree that some kind of note is necessary. The article currently says that "the Observance of 5th November Act 1605 was passed in January 1606," and that certainly requires clarification (it's even more important that the Observance of 5th November Act 1605 article contain a note, of course). -- 101.119.14.238 ( talk) 23:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
23:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Holiday's often have three aspects: legal, religious, and traditional informal celebrations. This is somewhat analogous to the three aspects of a wedding: registering the marriage with the civil authorities, a religious ceremony in a house of worship, and the reception with wedding cake, champagne, dancing, etc. These three aspects are often separable. Today all that survives of this holiday is the third aspect, the informal celebrations. However, for most of it's history it was a legal public holiday and a red-letter day in the church calendar. In the 17th century and well into the 18th, that would have meant compulsory church attendance, typically at 8:30 AM as on a Sunday, then something like regular Sunday services except for the topic of the sermon, and with extra prayers at the end. For the rest of the day, Sunday blue laws would have applied. No work, no public entertainments (the racetrack and theatre were closed) and no outdoor recreations such as stool-ball (an early form of cricket).
As soon the Thanksgiving Act was passed, Robert Barker (the same person who printed and published the King James Bible) printed up a supplement to the Book of Common Prayer entitled, PRAYERS AND THANKSGIVING, for the happy deliverance of his Majestie, the Queene, Prince, and States of Parliament from the bloody intended Massacre by Gunpowder, 5 November, 1605. These supplement were available in two typefaces, Roman and black letter, and in a range of sizes: folio, quarto, octavo, etc., all the way down to 64mo. In those days the Book of Common prayer as a whole was only revised infrequently, 1552 (Queen Elizabeth edition), 1559 (re-issue of 1552 edition), 1604 (Hampton Court revision). The next one after that was 1662. As a result, supplements were taken very seriously. When they were received, they along with the book were usually take to a bookbinder so that the supplement could be made part of the book, usually at the end. Churches, even small ones, were regularly inspected to make sure they had all the necessary paperwork: a Bible, a Book of Common Prayer with all the supplements, a psalter, etc. If it wasn't all there, the church could be shut down and have its credentials revoked.
In England, Gun-Powder Day (as it was known in the early 17th century) was the most popular holiday for Puritans, and usually their only annual holiday. In New England things were complicated. The Pilgrim separatists of the Plymouth Colony eschewed all annual holidays as "dead ritual." In the Massachusetts Bay Colony some holidays were observed in the early days (Christmas, St. Valentine's Day, etc.) but later in the 1630s the stricter sort of Puritans launched a War on Christmas that swept up all other annual holidays. In 1688 the ban was lifted, only to be put in force again in 1692. However, Gun-Powder-Treason Day (as it was known after 1662) was exempt and continued to be observed until the outbreak of the American Revolution.
In Virginia I'm still trying to find out if it was observed at Jamestown (or Fort James) in 1607. Theoretically it should have been, since the Virginia Company was very particular about making sure that the forms were observed, including red-letter days. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 15:44, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
For the last few weeks, I've been researching the various names by which this holiday has been known. It never had an official name, at least not de jure, as the Thanksgiving Act and the Book of Common Prayer only describe it in terms of what sort of holiday it was, when it was to be observed, for what purpose, etc. However, it had something approaching a de facto official name: Gunpowder Treason Day. It is first attested in 1611-12 as "daie of the Gunpowder treasonn." This name stuck, not only in England, but throughout the world, wherever English was spoken, up to the time the holiday became defunct in 1859, except in the United States, where the name went out of fashion with the outbreak of the American Revolution, when the holiday ceased to be observed here. "The fifth of November" was used with considerable frequency as well.
The after-dark festivities, on the other hand, had names of their own, possibly because they were never actually part of the holiday. The relationship between the two was something like the relationship between Ash Wednesday and Mardi Gras: Gunpowder Treason Day was when people went to church in the morning and prayed, then spent the rest of the day in quiet contemplation, staying home with family. Once the sun set below the horizon, the holiday was over and all hell broke loose. At that point it became Bonfire Night.
"Guy Faux day" is first attested in 1819, "Guy Vaux day" in 1820, Guy Fawkes Day in 1825, and Guy Fawkes Night in 1835.
Then there's "Pope's Day" and its variants, Pope Day and Pope Night.
Pope Day began in the port towns of Massachusetts in the 1730s, when visiting sailors, for the first time in the history of New England, were permitted to celebrate the after-dark festivities. Local children soon joined in on the fun and took to calling it Pope Day. In the mid-1760s, youth gangs in Boston recruited by wealthy political organizations (anti-Stamp Act Patriots) began holding impressive Pope Night or Pope Day festivities. There is no indication that any of these "pope" names were ever widely adopted outside of the small circles of children and youths in the port districts.
In England Pope Day turns up in the late 18th- and early 19th century, first in the context of children's speech, later in reference to juvenile delinquents. For example, "Pope Day" might occur in a political speech where the speaker is suggesting that his opponent is the sort of person who would called it Pope Day.
In 1835, Nathaniel Hawthorne published a story called "Old News" in The New-England Magazine - Volume 8:
Here is a volume of what were once newspapers each on a small half sheet yellow and time stained of a coarse fabric and imprinted with a rude old type Their aspect conveys a....
Governor Belcher makes proclamation against certain 'loose and dissolute people,' who have been wont to stop passengers in the streets, on the Fifth of November, 'otherwise called Pope's Day,' and levy contributions for the building of bonfires. In this instance, the populace are more puritanic than the magistrate.
This is the first occurrence of Pope's Day with an "apostrophe ess." Belcher was governor of Massachusetts from 1730 to 1741, but never issued any such proclamation, as Hawthorne's is a work of fiction.
Although published anonymously, it is later reprinting in various collections of short stories such as "The Snow-Image, and Other Twice-Told Tales." The following year, 1836, the diary of a prominent colonial-era New Englander is published, edited by his son. Although the author's text nowhere mentions "Pope's Day," the editor liberally sprinkles the book with "Pope's Day" in the footnotes, commentary, and chapter titles.
During the 19th century, "Pope Day" (without the s) turns up a few times, in the 1820s, and again in the 1850s. Then in the 1880s several books on the history of Catholics in US repeatedly use the term Pope Day.
The in 1894, Alice Morse Earle, in her book, "Customs and Fashions in Old New England" revives "Pope's Day" with an S, quoting Nathaniel Hawthorne without attribution and treating his short story as history. This sets off an avalanche of other books on the history of New England, the history of Holidays, and the history of holidays in New England, all using the term Pope's Day as if that had been what New Englanders called it.
Unfortunately, I learned all this by examining hundreds of primary sources, but can't find much in the way of reliable secondary sources that we can use a references. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 03:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
For the last few weeks, I've been researching the various names by which this holiday has been known. It never had an official name, at least not de jure, as the Thanksgiving Act and the Book of Common Prayer only describe it in terms of what sort of holiday it was, when it was to be observed, for what purpose, etc. However, it had something approaching a de facto official name: Gunpowder Treason Day. It is first attested in 1611-12 as "daie of the Gunpowder treasonn." This name stuck, not only in England, but throughout the world, wherever English was spoken, up to the time the holiday became defunct in 1859, except in the United States, where the name went out of fashion with the outbreak of the American Revolution, when the holiday ceased to be observed here. "The fifth of November" was used with considerable frequency as well.
The after-dark festivities, on the other hand, had names of their own, possibly because they were never actually part of the holiday. The relationship between the two was something like the relationship between Ash Wednesday and Mardi Gras: Gunpowder Treason Day was when people went to church in the morning and prayed, then spent the rest of the day in quiet contemplation, staying home with family. Once the sun set below the horizon, the holiday was over and all hell broke loose. At that point it became Bonfire Night.
"Guy Faux day" is first attested in 1819, "Guy Vaux day" in 1820, Guy Fawkes Day in 1825, and Guy Fawkes Night in 1835.
Then there's "Pope's Day" and its variants, Pope Day and Pope Night.
Pope Day began in the port towns of Massachusetts in the 1730s, when visiting sailors, for the first time in the history of New England, were permitted to celebrate the after-dark festivities. Local children soon joined in on the fun and took to calling it Pope Day. In the mid-1760s, youth gangs in Boston recruited by wealthy political organizations (anti-Stamp Act Patriots) began holding impressive Pope Night or Pope Day festivities. There is no indication that any of these "pope" names were ever widely adopted outside of the small circles of children and youths in the port districts.
In England Pope Day turns up in the late 18th- and early 19th century, first in the context of children's speech, later in reference to juvenile delinquents. For example, "Pope Day" might occur in a political speech where the speaker is suggesting that his opponent is the sort of person who would called it Pope Day.
In 1835, Nathaniel Hawthorne published a story called "Old News" in The New-England Magazine - Volume 8:
Here is a volume of what were once newspapers each on a small half sheet yellow and time stained of a coarse fabric and imprinted with a rude old type Their aspect conveys a....
Governor Belcher makes proclamation against certain 'loose and dissolute people,' who have been wont to stop passengers in the streets, on the Fifth of November, 'otherwise called Pope's Day,' and levy contributions for the building of bonfires. In this instance, the populace are more puritanic than the magistrate.
This is the first occurrence of Pope's Day with an "apostrophe ess." Belcher was governor of Massachusetts from 1730 to 1741, but never issued any such proclamation, as Hawthorne's is a work of fiction.
Although published anonymously, it is later reprinting in various collections of short stories such as "The Snow-Image, and Other Twice-Told Tales." The following year, 1836, the diary of a prominent colonial-era New Englander is published, edited by his son. Although the author's text nowhere mentions "Pope's Day," the editor liberally sprinkles the book with "Pope's Day" in the footnotes, commentary, and chapter titles.
During the 19th century, "Pope Day" (without the s) turns up a few times, in the 1820s, and again in the 1850s. Then in the 1880s several books on the history of Catholics in US repeatedly use the term Pope Day.
The in 1894, Alice Morse Earle, in her book, "Customs and Fashions in Old New England" revives "Pope's Day" with an S, quoting Nathaniel Hawthorne without attribution and treating his short story as history. This sets off an avalanche of other books on the history of New England, the history of Holidays, and the history of holidays in New England, all using the term Pope's Day as if that had been what New Englanders called it.
Unfortunately, I learned all this by examining hundreds of primary sources, but can't find much in the way of reliable secondary sources that we can use a references. Zyxwv99 ( talk) 03:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)