Talk:Field of the Cloth of Gold

message: Although I meant earlier to change the article's title back I actually didn't succeed. (Serves me right for trying to do something without having the instructions open in front of me.) I don't really regret this as it occurs to me what is precisely lacking is a history of the term "The Field of (the) Cloth of Gold" who called it that and when? Presumably it is not something like Wars of the Roses which (I believe) is a much later coinage. What I'd really like would be some juicy quotations of the period using the phrase. Stroika 19:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Anyone know anything about the history of the term?

message: "…a temporary palace covering an area of nearly 12,000 square yards (about 1,100 square metres)": Since a meter is only about 10% longer than a yard, these two numbers should be about the same order of magnitude. Clearly one or the other is wrong: which is it? Also, even after adjusting the numbers to the same magnitude, the conversion is still incorrect: 12,000 square yards is not 11,000 square meters but only about 10,000 (to be precise, 10,033)—or alternatively, 11,000 square meters is equivalent to over 13,000 square yards, not 12,000. Evidently whoever wrote this simply used a conversion factor of about 1.09 m/yd, neglecting to square it (1.19 sq m/sq yd) for areas. Can someone supply the correct numbers here?   —Dodiad 18:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Something doesn't add up

message: Inthe following, introduction to this site, is the following account;
"Background
 
Cardinal WolseyTwo entities had started to emerge as powers in Western Europe at this time: France, under Francis I, and the Habsburg Empire, under Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor. The Kingdom of England, still a lesser power, was being courted as an ally by the two major powers. The 1518 Treaty of London, a non-aggression pact between major European powers to help resist the Ottoman expansion into southeastern Europe, had just been signed. Henry also held meetings with Charles V a month before the Field of Cloth of Gold in the Netherlands and again afterwards at Calais, Henry's only possession in the Continent."
What a remarkable stupid opening statement!  Just what is any student or scholar to thing of this opening?  No where in the above is any mention of the King of England, other than this, "Henry also held meetings with Charles V a month before the Field of Cloth of Gold in the Netherlands and again afterwards at Calais, Henry's only possession in the Continent."
Just how is anyone to know that the "Henry" mentioned above could be Henry VIII, unless they were already familar with the subject material?
It is rough, and ungainly for any source of any respect!69.92.23.64 (talk) 03:24, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just why is Henry VII not mentioned? 

message: "The meeting
 
Henry VIII of England, copy after Holbein 
Francis I of FranceEach king tried to outshine the other, with dazzling tents and clothes, huge feasts, music, jousting, and games. The tents and the costumes displayed so much cloth of gold, an expensive fabric woven with silk and gold thread, that the site of the meeting was named after it."
I would just suggest that the words above could easily and correctly describe another segment of our past, that is "The Golden Fleece!"  Of what fabric were the above tents, clothes, etc., imbeded with goldend threads, imbeded within?  It is most obvious that "Wool", might well be the most common and correct answer!  Thus in ancient parlance "The Golden Fleece!"69.92.23.64 (talk) 03:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Meeting, and the Cloth! 

message: http://www.greydragon.org/pavilions/othertents.html69.92.23.64 (talk) 03:40, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perhaps some discussion of the Tents involved needs some discussion or at least a link? 

message: I hesitate to re-open old wounds here, but I can't help but noticed that the article title and its bold title don't match;  clearly the two should be the same, whichever is chosen (whether the other form is also used as an alt-title, or just discussed elsewhere in the article).  The article seems to be in its current form in part due to the over-zealous effort of one anon editor about a year ago, who expunged "the"s so thoroughly that they did it in filenames, interwiki links, and a sentence originally specifically about the "the" usage, now contradictorily making the same statement about the other form.  84.203.39.72 (talk) 02:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "the" 

message: Inviting contributors to expand the article using the following accounts from the State Papers of Henry VIII, plus an account from the Venetian archive: 
*'Henry VIII: June 1520', Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3: 1519-1523 (1867), pp. 299-319. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=91050 
*'Henry VIII: April 1520, 2-15', Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3: 1519-1523 (1867), pp. 249-264. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=91046
*'Henry VIII: May 1520, 16-30', Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3: 1519-1523 (1867), pp. 285-299. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=91049 
*'Venice: May 1520, 21-25', Calendar of State Papers Relating to English Affairs in the Archives of Venice, Volume 3: 1520-1526 (1869), pp. 14-34. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=94318
--Bhogrok (talk) 09:27, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested historical reference material / external link

message: I removed "also known as the Field of Golden Cloth", which had been in the first sentence, unsourced, for three years; and the crumpets and pots of strawberry jam, which had been in the text for two years. Andrew Dalby 18:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaned up a little 

message: If Henry VIII met Francis I, then Victoria cannot have met Louis Philippe - she must have met Lewis Philip.88.167.22.75 (talk) 09:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: We use whichever is most commonly used. Historians usually refer to Francis I and Louis Philippe I so that's what we use. Retroplum (talk) 14:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names of French Kings 

message: The long "excerpt" from Edward Hall's Chronicle is so shortened, paraphrased, and synthesized that it bears little relationship to what Hall actually says. (As one example, Hall specifically calls into question the parity of the two forces on the field, and it's quite an important point. See, for example, via the page's own "External Links" citation to Hall, pg. 609. Or consider, as another example, the claim that heralds called for silence when the kings met, when in fact Hall doesn't mention that at all, but instead specifies an enormously loud set of fanfares, pg. 610.) It's striking that whoever added this "excerpt" didn't provide a simple click-through citation. It looks to me like a combination and pastiche of various sources, rather than a reliable quotation from Edward Hall's history. As such, it probably shouldn't be indented and treated as something exact. I am not a Tudor specialist, however, so I wouldn't want to meddle with the text myself. 70.20.52.54 (talk) 21:33, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Excerpts from Hall's Chronicle." 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Field of the Cloth of Gold. 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/20060301144649/http://www.alectouk.com/The%20Field%20of%20the%20Cloth%20of%20Gold.htm to http://www.alectouk.com/The%20Field%20of%20the%20Cloth%20of%20Gold.htm
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) 07:55, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: the citation for citation #10 links to a page which give a page not found error  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.101.119.215 (talk) 17:18, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Dealt with. Thanks for pointing this out.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of date citation 

message: The article is not actually about a field or location but an event--the meeting. Historians use the term to refer to this famous meeting, and its lavishness. Rjensen (talk) 16:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contents 

message: Regarding the location of the palace, this article needs to be consulted and cited: Julian Munby (2014) The Field of Cloth of Gold: Guînes and
the Calais Pale Revisited, English Heritage Historical Review, 9:1, 30-63, DOI:10.1179/1752016915Z.00000000026
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1179/1752016915Z.00000000026
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.16.2 (talk) 11:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location  

message: Were Anne and Mary Boleyn there? What about Mary Brandon, Duchess of Suffolk? Because Thomas Boleyn was there, and Charles Brandon. Oric22 (talk) 14:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who was there