Talk:The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstruous Regiment of Women

message: 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'm thinking your recollection is mistaken.  I could find more authoritative evidence, I'm sure, but a quick google search showed 14,600 hits for "The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment" and only 106 hits for "The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regimen".  Jwrosenzweig 04:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, take a look at the image of the title page, it uses Regimen... Modest Genius talk 10:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the image you refer to is of a reprinted edition from 1766, centuries after the initial publication, and taking that fact in the context of the Google info above and the fact that the e-texts we link to use "regiment", I'm inclined to think that this is a printer's error on the particular edition we have an image of.  If we can determine that it's not a printer's error, but a variant spelling used in at least a few significant editions, perhaps some note should be made.  Jwrosenzweig 06:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I offer the cautious transcribers of Project Gutenberg, as evidence of "regiment": http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext06/8trmp10h.htm - It's not like we haven't dropped another letter since these reprints. (We'd call it the "regime of women" today.) -Yamara ✉ 00:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that. It does seem to be the case that Knox wrote "regiment". The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary gives both "regimen" and "regiment" as words which existed in Knox's time, with different but overlapping meanings. ("Régime" came in from French later.) It looks as though editors in e.g. 1766 used the "regimen" spelling because they thought it was clearer, and in fact I agree with them. I don't think there's any question of a misprint. But as far as the article is concerned, it must be right to go mainly with Knox's spelling, but there ought to be some note about the other, if only to stop the title-page image from looking stupid. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 09:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

text: The above is correct.  It's unfortunate that, given the correction, the page has been allowed to stay in its incorrect state for so long. RandomCritic (talk) 02:21, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't that be 'regimen'? 

message: 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"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). and an "initial outburst against female rule".Kyle, Richard G., The Church-State Patterns in the Thought of John Knox, op. cit., p. 73. Nick Levinson (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  JStor and other sources quoted 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Second Blast