Jump to content

Talk:Michaelmas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Alphabetical list It would be an improvement if the institutions were listed alphathebetically, the order at the moment seems pretty random.

I'm still none the wiser

[edit]

So, Michaelmas is a Christian festival celebrated on Sep 29. But what is it celebrating? The article doesn't tell me.... Does it have any significance beyong being a quarter day? I presume so, but the article doesn't tell me what... Roy Badami 01:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is the Feast Day / Saint's Day for St Michael the Archangel (Michael's Mass) CDV 11:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Feast days do not necessarily celebrate an occurence; every day of the year is a feast day for at least one of the Saints. Thus, September 29th just happens to be the feast day of St. Michael the Archangel. Since St. Michael is pretty important, his feast day used to be a holy day of obligation, which means it is a day when one is supposed to attend mass. Phil Bastian 18:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of copyrighted section

[edit]

I've taken out the three paragraphs that quite openly claim to be taken from a copyrighted source, the Encyclopedia Britannica, in line with WP:CP. I've also removed the reference to beige trousers in relation to Michaelmas, it being both unsubstantiated (please include a source if you revert this) and trivia. QuantumGroupie 16:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Angels and Saints

[edit]

To be a saint, one has to have lived on earth as a human being!!! "Saint" Michael and his "heavenly host" friends never did so. So, how can they be saints? (It is also normally required that the candidate be Roman Catholic (forget the daft ideas of the Mormons). Michael and his chums were presumably Jewish as they appear in the Jewish Bible (Old Testament). All very confusing!!!--PeadarMaguidhir 12:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps confusing, but the fact is that in some Christian belief-systems (e.g. Catholicism), to have lived on earth as a human being is not in fact a requirement; Michael and the archangels are recognized as saints. Your point about them being Jewish is interesting, but as they aren't human it's difficult to declare them adherents of any religion; but in ancient Judaism it could be presumed, perhaps, that God and His human and angelic followers were all Jewish in this cosmic sense. Even so, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. have been "brought into the fold" as Christian patriarchs, as have the angels. To Christians, there is only one Bible (i.e. the Hebrew Scriptures or Old Testament are not exclusively Jewish). --198.59.190.201 16:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel (as well as other angels) are celebrated on the calenders of saints and recognized as saints in the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran churches. One does not have to live on earth to be a saint, nor are angels part of a religion. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:11, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland

[edit]
Michaelmas has also delineated time and seasons for secular purposes as well, particularly in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

Can someone change this to the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland? There is no such political entity as 'Ireland'. Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.69.66.170 (talk) 23:04, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly backwards. There is no country which calls itself "Republic of Ireland", but there is one which calls itself "Ireland". Tb (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We're talking about traditions dating back centuries before the existence of Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom as political entities. I would suggest the phrase Britain and Ireland be used.TheMathemagician (talk) 09:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Need for an article on Old Michaelmas Day

[edit]

Did readers know that October 11 is Old Michaelmas Day? There is an interesting story about why you should not pick blackberries after that day, which is to do with the fall of Satan from Heaven after losing his battle with St. Michael. Should we start a Wikipedia article on this date, or else incorporate this information here? ACEOREVIVED 21:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC) I first learnt about this from a paperback entitled "Festivals and Customs", by Patricia Morrell, published, I believe, by Piccolo Books, about 1977. If any one has this book, or other sources that could be a good citation, the "Old Michaelmas" would receive some book citation. ACEOREVIVED 19:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added the reference to the Morrell book, having found the paperback myself. This book gives the date of Old Michaelmas Day as October 11, but according to Cooper and Sullivan (1994), and also some websites, the date is [[October 10]. Cooper and Sullivan refer to some other customs surrounding Old Michaelmas, such as Old Michaelmas fairs. ACEOREVIVED 19:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference:

Cooper, Q. & Sullivan, P. (1994). "Maypoles, Martyrs and Mayhem". London: Bloomsbury. ISBN: 0 7475 18070

Not sure about the difference between the devil spitting and urinating on blackberries. I imagine the spitting is just a euphemism. I'm from the Midlands and was told in no uncertain terms that Satan pisses on blackberries late in the season. In my experience, it's usually dogs!Sjwells53 (talk) 13:54, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It should be October 10. Michaelmas is 29 September and in 1752 Britain skipped 11 days to adopt the Gregorian calendar so Old Michaelmas Day was calculated as 10 October (29 September plus eleven days).TheMathemagician (talk) 09:51, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the reference to the Julian calendar here if old citations were correct that it was the 11th or 10th of October, because the proper movement calculation is in the OPPOSITE direction. For example, in 1621, the time of the Pilgrims' first Thanksgiving, the 29th of September of our Gregorian calendar would have been the 19th of September in their Julian Calendar, which the Pilgrims were still using (see [1]) (see also this Google answer: "The Mayflower Compact was signed aboard ship on November 11, 1620 by the Pilgrims (21-Nov-1620 on the modern Gregorian Calendar.") The days move FORWARD if you "skip" the 10 (originally 15, I believe, when the calendar was devised), not BACK. So my guess is the Christians simply ALTERED the day completely, since it's "just" a feast day and not a Saint's day, I'm guessing to make it coordinate more to the first full moon following the autumnal equinox--which in 1621 happened to be on THURSDAY the 30th of September, following the equinox of Sep 22nd (12th on their Julian calendar as you can see at [2])... OR the previously cited sources from 1987 and later are simply incorrect. Can't we find some Vatian source or something from that time period? Prosandcons (talk) 16:29, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://5ko.free.fr/en/jul.php?y=1621
  2. ^ https://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/seasons.html?year=1600

Differences in number of archangels

[edit]

I've added a news section, with text and cites. I'll add the exact page of the LFF citation later. Bearian (talk) 19:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph of students

[edit]

What significance is that photo of students in England, besides being on Michaelmas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.116.68.36 (talk) 12:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:16, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
actually, there is. historically, the autumn term in british schools has been referred to as the michaelmas term.Toyokuni3 (talk) 13:11, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Michaelmas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

NO Connexion between Michaelmas and the US Supreme Court

[edit]

There is NO connexion between the US Supreme Court and the Feast of Michaelmas. It is purely an accident of history that the Court begins its annual term on the first Monday in October.

The first U.S. Congress and first President of the United States under the second American constitution took office on 4 March 1789.

President Washington appointed and the Senate confirmed the first Chief Justice of the United States, and the first associate justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, on 28 September 1789. *THAT* is why the Congress legislated that the court's term should begin in October. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with Michaelmas - a holiday that most of the founding fathers, including the first Supreme Court justices, did NOT observe.

2601:645:C300:16DD:6D61:CB44:4606:1568 (talk) 06:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Michaelmas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:36, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Michaelmas. 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:

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) 21:17, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is Lancaster really one of the older universities?

[edit]

This article says that some universities call their Autumn term Michaelmas, and then says these tend to be older universities. It then goes on to list articles, and includes the University of Lancaster, but since Lancaster's university was not founded until 1964, I hardly think it qualifies as one of the older universities. Vorbee (talk) 17:21, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 1960s 'plate glass' universities like Lancaster certainly used to be considered new, but this is no longer the case. Most people now use the term 'new universities' to refer to the many polyversities created in the 1990s such as Oxford Brookes University. The 60s universities mostly based their academic structures and terminology on Oxbridge and the redbricks and have 3 ten week terms including Michaelmas, while most of the polyversities use an American style semester system. --Ef80 (talk) 10:39, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned in the Bible

[edit]

The text currently states that only three archangels are mentioned in the Bible. However, Uriel is mentioned in the King James Bible (in 2 Esdras), and he's also mentioned in the Latin Vulgate (in 4 Esdras, the same book as above, but Vulgate numbering is different from KJV numbering.) I purpose to change this text. Rwflammang (talk) 23:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody calls it "Michaelmas" anymore

[edit]

Well, when I say "nobody" I mean that Roman Catholics don't call it that. The Catholic Church calls this day "Feast of Saints Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael, archangels" and "Michaelmas" has been reformed out of the liturgical lexicon. Traditionalists will continue to refer to Michaelmas but this pertains to minority use of the 1960 Calendar.

This point is germane today because the link to "Michaelmas" will soon be placed on WP:Main Page and I would prefer that we call it by the WP:COMMONNAME at that point, since it is so public and our reputation for accuracy is at stake. Elizium23 (talk) 02:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no subject knowledge but would like to point out that the COMMONNAME and the article name should be the same. Hence, the article needs moving or Michaelmas is still the COMMONNAME. Schwede66 08:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amenadiel

[edit]

I stumbled over the sentence "In the Christian angelology of some traditions, the Archangel Michael is a Seraphim and is third in power behind Amenadiel and Lucifer." When you enter the name Amenadiel in a search engine, what you get are tons of references to the tv series Lucifer, and not anything regarding actual mythology. I have a strong feeling that somebody tries to sell us the series as mythology. I tried to check the reference given for the whole paragraph (Saint Michael the Archangel in medieval English legend), but that one is a book one can't access freely. Don't wanted to edit the actual article given that I am not certain. 2001:1A81:7441:C600:A5E3:701:5253:8963 (talk) 21:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the origin removed?

[edit]

The part about how it was originally the Eve of the dedication of a Church by Pope Boniface on September 30th? KuudereKun 11:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michaelmas&oldid=1264962629"