![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2020 and 14 April 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Cdev007.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 11:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Frankly, I think this may be misnamed--a link about the work by Knox ought to be the title, perhaps with redirects from "monstrous regiment of women" and "monstrous regiment". The first sentence is simply ugly--I don't know how to write it more elegantly. Any thoughts about any of this? Jwrosenzweig 22:08 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)
For who can denie but it is repugneth to nature, that the blind shall be appointed to leade and conduct such as do see? That the weake, the sicke and impotent persons shall norishe and kepe the hole and strong? And finallie, that the foolishe, madde and phrenetike shal governe the discrete and give counsel to such as be sober of mind. And such be al women, compared unto man in bearing of authoritie. For their sight in civile regiment is but blindness; their strength, weaknes; their counsel, foolishnes; and judgment, phrensie, if it be rightlie considered."
I'm sure it's regimen. It used to confuse me when I was at uni. I've been looking through my notes to try to find the facsimile copy they handed out for our lectures. No luck yet.
I was taught many years ago that it was "regimen". Since you (Jwrosenzweig) say "I could find more authoritative evidence, I'm sure", we'd all be very grateful if you could do so. Thanks. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 21:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
It would be more consistent if an image were uploaded with the "regiment" title to replace the "regimen" picture currently showing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.222.240.210 ( talk) 08:59, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
The National Library of Scotland has on its website a digital image of the title page of the first edition. This was published anonymously in 1558 (M D LVIII), and does contain the word regiment rather than regimen http://digital.nls.uk/scotlandspages/timeline/1558.html. I'm not techno savvy enough to be able to make changes to this page, but perhaps one of you others could manage it. A second point about this article is that Mary, Queen of Scots, was a child in 1558, and Knox was really more concerned with the rule of her mother, Mary of Guise, who was regent of Scotland at the time. Thirdly, I'm not convinced that Knox was not against the authority of women in all walks of life; the extract on the page rather confirms this, as does the very first paragraph of the work itself. Lalar99 ( talk) 18:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I didn't have time to add to this article, but used it for another, and the results might be useful for this one, if anyone is interested in applying the research. I used the citations in this article. To find some of my research, including quotations, see reference notes (which include quotations) in a past revision of Matriarchy. Also, John Knox expressed "opposition to female rule"<ref>[http://pao.chadwyck.com/PDF/1342489274972.pdf Kyle, Richard G., ''The Church-State Patterns in the Thought of John Knox'', in ''A Journal of Church and State'', vol. 30, no. 1 (Winter 1988), in ''Periodicals Archive Online'' (ProQuest) (database)], as accessed July 16, 2012, p. 71 (author prof. history & religion & chair, div. soc. scis., Tabor Coll., Hillsboro, Kans.) (subscription may be required for online access).</ref> and an "initial outburst against female rule".<ref>Kyle, Richard G., ''The Church-State Patterns in the Thought of John Knox'', ''op. cit.'', p. 73.</ref> Nick Levinson ( talk) 15:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Is this statement accurate: "Knox intended to write a Second Blast and a Third Blast, but after seeing how people responded to the First, neither ever became reality."
I ask, having noticed that the title page picture here says "To which is added, The Contents of the Second Blast". TurnipWatch ( talk) 17:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2020 and 14 April 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Cdev007.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 11:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Frankly, I think this may be misnamed--a link about the work by Knox ought to be the title, perhaps with redirects from "monstrous regiment of women" and "monstrous regiment". The first sentence is simply ugly--I don't know how to write it more elegantly. Any thoughts about any of this? Jwrosenzweig 22:08 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)
For who can denie but it is repugneth to nature, that the blind shall be appointed to leade and conduct such as do see? That the weake, the sicke and impotent persons shall norishe and kepe the hole and strong? And finallie, that the foolishe, madde and phrenetike shal governe the discrete and give counsel to such as be sober of mind. And such be al women, compared unto man in bearing of authoritie. For their sight in civile regiment is but blindness; their strength, weaknes; their counsel, foolishnes; and judgment, phrensie, if it be rightlie considered."
I'm sure it's regimen. It used to confuse me when I was at uni. I've been looking through my notes to try to find the facsimile copy they handed out for our lectures. No luck yet.
I was taught many years ago that it was "regimen". Since you (Jwrosenzweig) say "I could find more authoritative evidence, I'm sure", we'd all be very grateful if you could do so. Thanks. SamuelTheGhost ( talk) 21:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
It would be more consistent if an image were uploaded with the "regiment" title to replace the "regimen" picture currently showing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.222.240.210 ( talk) 08:59, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
The National Library of Scotland has on its website a digital image of the title page of the first edition. This was published anonymously in 1558 (M D LVIII), and does contain the word regiment rather than regimen http://digital.nls.uk/scotlandspages/timeline/1558.html. I'm not techno savvy enough to be able to make changes to this page, but perhaps one of you others could manage it. A second point about this article is that Mary, Queen of Scots, was a child in 1558, and Knox was really more concerned with the rule of her mother, Mary of Guise, who was regent of Scotland at the time. Thirdly, I'm not convinced that Knox was not against the authority of women in all walks of life; the extract on the page rather confirms this, as does the very first paragraph of the work itself. Lalar99 ( talk) 18:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I didn't have time to add to this article, but used it for another, and the results might be useful for this one, if anyone is interested in applying the research. I used the citations in this article. To find some of my research, including quotations, see reference notes (which include quotations) in a past revision of Matriarchy. Also, John Knox expressed "opposition to female rule"<ref>[http://pao.chadwyck.com/PDF/1342489274972.pdf Kyle, Richard G., ''The Church-State Patterns in the Thought of John Knox'', in ''A Journal of Church and State'', vol. 30, no. 1 (Winter 1988), in ''Periodicals Archive Online'' (ProQuest) (database)], as accessed July 16, 2012, p. 71 (author prof. history & religion & chair, div. soc. scis., Tabor Coll., Hillsboro, Kans.) (subscription may be required for online access).</ref> and an "initial outburst against female rule".<ref>Kyle, Richard G., ''The Church-State Patterns in the Thought of John Knox'', ''op. cit.'', p. 73.</ref> Nick Levinson ( talk) 15:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Is this statement accurate: "Knox intended to write a Second Blast and a Third Blast, but after seeing how people responded to the First, neither ever became reality."
I ask, having noticed that the title page picture here says "To which is added, The Contents of the Second Blast". TurnipWatch ( talk) 17:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)