Talk:Regency era

Regency Reenactment Groups
Any reason why this list was included? This group does not belong in this section. Vsanborn (talk) 04:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI: I have created a page for the Regency Reenactment groups and linked it to Historical Reenactment and to the popular culture section of this page.Vsanborn (talk) 15:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Page title dispute
I'm going to put this back at "English Regency", simply because (a) that's what it has been commonly known as, and we tend to go for "most common usage" by preference; and (b) because it differentiates the period in UK history from any other type of regency. Thus, I recommend this page NOT be moved to "Regency". -- April 22:17 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)


 * Why is this the 'English' Regency when it was also the regency in Scotland and Ireland? -- IP 86.132.4.240, 01:10, 2 April 2006


 * Good question -- many people would unconsciously assume that London was setting the social trends, but actually the Scottish enlightenment was still going pretty strong then. (However, Ireland was in a sad state at that time.)  In any case, the term as it is used today is more social than it is strictly political, and "English Regency" is probably the most commonly-occurring form (other than just plain "Regency"). Churchh 05:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The title of this page is English Regency, however this is not at all correct, as the Regent was not only so of England but of all the UK, and in the intrests of correctness this should be changed to the more appropriate British Regency

The above comment was made at the top of the article at 07:50, 20 August 2007 by User:George Pinkerton. I moved the comment here to the discussion page and placed it under the appropriate heading. Laura1822 21:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I was shocked to find this page at "English" Regency. It is quite wrong to suggest that this is the common terminology. As well as being misleading to the reader, it is insulting to non-English residents of Britain. Deb (talk) 18:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it should be termed the Regency Era, which is distinct from the Georgian Era and the Empire period in France. It's a given that the Regency Era refers to the British Isles. Vsanborn (talk) 13:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, "Regency" or "Regency era" are both much better than the startling and disconcerting title "British Regency", which is a term I've never heard before. Lachrie (talk) 02:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Article has now been restored to Regency era title.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  01:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Regency clothing styles
There seems to be basically nothing at all on English Wikipedia on Regency fashions, except for a very brief mention of Regency men's clothing styles at the end of Regency architecture (though it's women's clothing styles which the period is most noted for). I'll try to start an article, though it probably won't be much at first. Churchh 03:26, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah, found one that's at least semi-relevant: Empire silhouette, though it's sorely lacking in pictures. Churchh 03:34, 7 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Go for it; I felt that way about Elizabethan clothes when I got here and now look at me... as I have said elsewhere, I'd like to see Wikipedia's articles on clothes to be as comprehensive and authoritative as its articles on botany.


 * Feel free to start an article Regency fashion (a la Victorian fashion) if you like and link it to the logical places. Holler if you need help with pictures. PKM 06:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Now started up at 1795-1820 in fashion (much still to do). Churchh 19:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

DICKENS SHOULD BE LISTED
Pickwick Papers and Oliver Twist were published prior to Victoria ascending the throne. Moreoever, even the later novels are set in the Regency period -- ie. the period of Dicken's own childhood. Thus, in David Copperfield, when the King's health is drunk, it is George IV who is meant.

68.8.171.83 02:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The Pickwick papers were published during the transition from William IV to Victoria, 16 years or so after the end of the formal legal Regency. Dickens has his historical novels (i.e. pre 19th-century), his pre-railway novels (set in the early 19th-century), and his railway novels (i.e. set more or less contemporaneously in the period when they were published), but to my mind his pre-railway novels do not have a strong flavor of Regency England, and it's hard for me to say in what sense Dickens was really a "Regency writer"... Churchh 12:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I think sometimes people confuse the Regency Period with the Georgian Era and with the French Empire period. The Regency refers (strictly) to the time that the Prince Regent ruled from 1811-1820 prior to becoming King. Having said that, the British Isles should be included. Oliver Twist, written in 1838, does not even fall into the Georgian Era, which (some say) ended with William IV's death in 1837, but which most would say ended in 1830 with George IV's death.Vsanborn (talk) 13:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thinking more on this topic, Dickens should be included in the Georgian Era, which runs through 1840. The British Regency has been designated a tight timeline from 1811-1820.Vsanborn (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Jane Austen
She's famous now, but she actually wasn't that widely publicly known at the time. Churchh 12:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * She is still a product of her era and all her novels are set during this time period. Vsanborn (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Northanger Abbey was set earlier than 1810. Churchh (talk) 04:24, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire
While her influence probably still loomed large in the Regency, she died in 1806, five years before the period described by this section began. Strictly speaking her name belongs to the Georgian era. If no one has an objection, this sentence needs to be changed. I'll wait for discussion before doing so: "Headed by the widely popular Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, the nobility sought to outdo one another in extravagance, pomp, and circumstance, albeit of a “shallow” nature[1]."Vsanborn (talk) 08:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

The Times' Production Capabilities
" In 1814, The Times adopted steam printing thereby increasing production capabilities, along with demand tenfold (printing 1100 sheets per hour versus the previous 200 per hour).[7] "

200->1100 isn't tenfold, right? Which figure is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.29.19 (talk) 03:12, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Monarch
Monarch was still King George III in Regency periodChamika1990 (talk) 15:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

An earlier British Regency?
In the 6th Poldark novel The Four Swans (Book Two, chapter III), George Warleggan is said to have been to London and seen the Prince Regent and Lady Holland at a theatre. This would be around 1796.

Were it any other author I should consider this simply a blunder; but Graham's historical research is otherwise so detailed and so accurate that I can't help wondering if it is a gap in my education.

Was there a previous regency at that time, of any duration? And who would Lady Holland have been? Paul Magnussen (talk) 17:55, 16 September 2013 (UTC)


 * There were previous episodes of mental disturbance and talk of appointing a regency, but this was not actually done until 1811. See George III of the United Kingdom. Churchh (talk) 21:17, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

List of places
The "list of places associated with the Regency era" seems to be, in actual fact, a list of places mentioned in Jane Austen novels, particularly given the links to the now-defunct Prints George "Jane Austen places" webpage. Could we make it more informative and illustrative of the era's architecture and civic development to list only those places built during or just before the era? Ibadibam (talk) 19:45, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Regency Era
The first line of this article reads:

″The Regency in Great Britain was a period when King George III was deemed unfit to rule and his son ruled as his proxy as Prince Regent."

I'm no expert on this era, but I don't believe that either the Prince Regent or George III 'ruled'. They 'reigned', but power was mostly in the hands of Parliament, not the monarch or his surrogate.

Dantes Warden (talk) 09:43, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Regency 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/20090505074057/http://users.bathspa.ac.uk/greenwood/ to http://users.bathspa.ac.uk/greenwood/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:36, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Great Britain or the United Kingdom
In the lead it currently states "Great Britain", but for people and events after the Act of Union, 1800 most Wikipedia articles use "United Kingdom". Should this page follow suit? -- PBS (talk) 12:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

It already linked to the correct article, just using a confusing short name. Dimadick (talk) 14:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Regency is a sub-period
On the side, the page says this:

''Regency era

c. 1811 – 1820

Preceded by	Georgian era

Followed by	Victorian era''

The rest of this article is clear that Regency was a sub-period. Why not here?

Regency was a sub-period inside the Georgian Era.

161.8.195.186 (talk) 02:18, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Formatting and clean-up
I'm struggling to find proper guidelines for this specific case, but I am not confident in the formatting of this page, specifically the Events, Places, and Notable People sections. My concern with the latter two is that they are over-long and don't provide much justification (justification may not be exactly necessary for these things but it would be nice to know why exactly Bath (a city) and Brooks's (a gentleman's club) are significant, and warrant being on the same page despite being very different). I can understand wanting this information to be easy to find, but I think there may be better ways of going about it. My first thought was a collapsable table with: the name of person/place; image; category/title e.g. poet, architect, etc.; and their significance to the Regency period/why they're here in the first place. Tables have pros and cons, apparently they aren't good for screen-readers but I'm not sure the current state of things is doing a much better job. The other solution, of course, is cutting large parts of these lists entirely. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? If a table or alternative would be good I am happy to work on that, but I thought I'd check if this has already been considered first. --Dibleopard (talk) 16:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)


 * As a new editor, I suppose I can claim to be looking at the article with a fresh pair of eyes. I agree with you that it has serious issues. I think the long lists should go and the article should be an illustrated narrative with an emphasis on social conditions, although the industrial, political and cultural developments must also feature. It doesn't help anyone to be confronted by huge lists which provide only names. I think the chronology section is unsatisfactory. I will try to assist improvement of the article.
 * Sistorian (talk) 21:59, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have made a start by revising and expanding the introductory section and the Perception and Society sections, but I have not yet done anything with the lists or the chronology. I do not know if the quality and importance assessments on this page have any useful value but my reading of the quality scale information strongly suggests the article is over-rated at level C. I have replaced C with Start because the key phrase for that level is "An article that is developing but still quite incomplete", and that is how I would assess this article as is. If I have misunderstood the ratings, please by all means restore the C levels. Thank you.
 * Sistorian (talk) 05:10, 17 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I will be away for a lengthy period after today. I think the lead is good to go for the time being, depending what else goes into the article. Many of the sections need to be expanded and I think the gallery contents should be apportioned to relevant sections as I have just done with the Theatre Royal. The Morrison book is very good if anyone can use that for additional information. I will continue when I return but if anyone else can help while I am away, thank you and good luck.
 * Sistorian (talk) 12:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

"c. 1795"
What is the basis of this approximate date? Nothing in the article indicates why 1795 was chosen or by whom, it just declares that this is generally accepted without citing any source for that claim. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)