Talk:History of the English fiscal system

Untitled
Should this be worked into Economic history of Britain instead of having and article with EB1911 title?-- Birgitte§β ʈ  Talk  20:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Separate article status
I feel strongly that the content in this article is worthly of a separate article rather than being merged or just being deleted by passing admins.

Its a subtle difference, but enonomy does not equal finance.

This article is truely a history of the fical development of England which in large part has become the dominant fiscal model for western economies. To acentuate this point I have renamed the article to History of the English fiscal system.

I will attempt to edit the page to something more concise and introduce some modern refernces to stress the importance of the developments discussed.

Please discuss here if you feel this is a bad thing, stating reasons.

simonthebold 12:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Being at a loose end at present, I began to sub-edit this a bit at a time. Hope you don't mind although, if you do, I gather that all is not lost and you can reoover the original.  At present, I have reached only the heading, 'The Clergy.'  Unfortunately, I can't make sense of the second paragraph thereunder about the Lancastrian age.  Also something seems to be wrong with the figures here (and in other places as well).


 * Hope I haven't contravened any of Wikepedia's rules/instructions etc. but there are so many of them and, to be quite honest, I'm a total technological idiot.


 * Vee1534 (talk) 11:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup
I have gone through the majority of this article to wikify and cleanup the mistakes. Apparently this article was submitted using text scanned off of the original copy. There are some words or numerical groups which were wrecked by the scanner and I have marked those between ?.....? There are also some British terms that escape my knowledge of. --Brad101 04:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Too technical
mikemillerdc (talk) 20:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Totally disagree. This is a very useful article to students of mediaeval finance. It is a complex topic. This article is perfectly understandable by the average reader who wishes to apply himself to its study. Any article on this topic will require careful study, it cannot be "spoon-fed". I believe you underestimate the intelligence of the WP user. For those who cannot understand long-sentences (what a derogatory thing to say about anyone!), Plain English WP is available. For people of average intelligence, keen to apply themselves and to learn, WP is here for you, we do not talk-down to our readers or dumb-down our text!(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC))

Removal of "Update" tag
I have removed the tag for the following reason. No reason was given, as it purports, on the talk page as to what the problem was. If the tag is to be re-instated, please supply the reason on the talk page in order that the required edits can be made to improve the article as required. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC))

Viscounts
Seems odd that viscounts would be taxed more than earls. Earls are higher than viscounts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.6.88 (talk) 19:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

History of measurement
I removed the following from the systematizing section of the article:

"Weights and measures were among the earliest tools invented by man. Primitive societies needed rudimentary measures for many tasks:  constructing dwellings of an appropriate size and shape, fashioning clothing and bartering food or raw materials.  Man understandably turned first to parts of his body and his natural surroundings for measuring instruments. Early Babylonian and Egyptian records, and the Bible, indicate that length was first measured with the forearm, hand, or finger and that time was measured by the periods of the sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies.  When it was necessary to compare the capacities of containers such as gourds or clay or metal vessels, they were filled with plant seeds that were then counted to measure the volumes. With the development of scales as a means for weighing, seeds and stones served as standards.  For instance, the "carat," still used as a mass unit for gems, is derived from the carob seed. As societies evolved, measurements became more complex. The invention of numbering systems and the science of mathematics made it possible to create whole systems of measurement units suited to trade and commerce, land division, taxation, and scientific research. For these more sophisticated uses, it was necessary not only to weigh and measure more complex things it was also necessary to do it accurately time after time and in different places. However, with limited international exchange of goods and communication of ideas, it is not surprising that different systems for the same purpose developed and became established in different parts of the world - even in the English system. The measurement system commonly used in the United States today is nearly the same as that brought by the colonists from England. These measures had their origins in a variety of cultures –Babylonian, Egyptian, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, and Norman French. The ancient "digit," "palm," "span" and "cubic" units of length slowly lost preference to the length units "inch," "foot," and "yard." Roman contributions include the use of 12 as a base number (the foot is divided into 12 inches) and the words from which we derive many of our present measurement unit names. For example, the 12 divisions of the Roman "pes," or foot were called unciae. Our words "inch" and "ounce" are both derived from that Latin word. The "yard" as a measure of length can be traced back to early Saxon kings. They wore a sash or girdle around the waist that could be removed and used as a convenient measuring device. The word "yard" comes from the Saxon word "gird" meaning the circumference of a person’s waist. Standardizing various units and combining them into loosely related systems of measurement units sometimes occurred in fascinating ways. Tradition holds that King Henry I decreed that a yard should be the distance from the tip of his nose to the end of his outstretched thumb. The length of a furlong (or furrow-long) was established by early Tudor rulers as 220 yards. This led Queen Elizabeth I to declare in the 16th century, that henceforth the traditional Roman mile of 5000 feet would be replaced by one of 5280 feet, making the mile exactly eight furlongs and providing a convenient relationship between the furlong and the mile. Thus, through royal edicts, England by the 18th century had achieved a greater degree of standardization than other European countries. The English units were well suited to commerce and trade because they had been developed and refined to meet commercial needs. Through English colonization and its dominance of world commerce during the 17th, 18th, and l9th centuries, the English system of measurement units became established in many parts of the world, including the American colonies. However, standards still differed to an extent undesirable for commerce, even among the 13 American colonies. The need for greater uniformity led to clauses in the Articles of Confederation (ratified by the original colonies in 1781) and the Constitution of the United States (ratified in 1790) that gave Congress the power to fix uniform standards for weights and measures. Today, standards supplied to all the states by the National Institute of Standards and Technology assure uniformity throughout the country." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peash (talk • contribs) 06:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)