Talk:Shays' Rebellion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Old talk
Actually, in my 10th grade History book, it's listed as "Shays's Rebellion". Although I'm not sure if "Shays'" or "Shays's" is more grammatically correct.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by G00dynoshoes (talk • contribs) 22:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
This should really be Shays' Rebellion, not Shay's rebellion, but wouldn't that mean changing the name of the page and all It is his first rule: http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk.html#1
-Bugmuncher 23:32, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)
-
-
- I have a lot of respect for Prof. Strunk, and use his guide a lot; nevertheless he hasn't been with us in a while, and I'm not sure but that common usage may have changed since then. (Google would say it has, at least in this specific case, if that means anything.) If you want to move it to Shays's I certainly won't object; my main concern is that it obviously wasn't David Shay who organized it, and therefore the first title was inarguably wrong. - Hephaestos 02:42, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)
-
More importantly, the page is basically a fairy tale right now. Yes, Shay's rebellion was over taxation, but it was also over the credit burden and the victory of finance capital over the countryside. And it certainly wasn't just "this one guy decided to get up and fight against taxes and a bunch of guys came with him". DanKeshet
I'm not sure how you can read Strunk and White -- even the first edition -- and come away thinking that it is supposed to be "Shays'." His last name ends in "s" but there was only one of him -- "Shays" is not plural. The article must be corrected to read "Shays's Rebellion," as it appears in every encyclopedia that follows the rules of standard written English. [Mr. Reznick (no user profile)]
The standardly accepted form is "Shays'" and the correct pronunciation is "Shayz", not "Shayzez". I will, however admit that "Shays's" does appear, even in recent works on the subject. Interestingly, none of the monuments I've found in the actual area of the Rebellion use an apostrophe at all. They all read "Shays", as if the name were originally "THE Shays Rebellion" or something. - Dunkelza 21:30, 6/28/2005 (EDT)
I moved the page to "Shays Rebellion" and redirected the other two spellings. I chose this spelling based on the monuments: http://www.shaysridesagain.org/memorial.jpg http://friends.backcountry.net/ccatalan/MassAT/atpix/Shaysmonument.jpg - Dunkelza 22:00, 6/28/2005 (EDT)
Dunkelza's second link is dead, and I don't always trust signs, but I see that the US State Department uses the same spelling as Dunkelza refers to: http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/history/ch4.htm#articles The above article mentions "the Shays Rebellion." In the light of all this disagreement, it is appropriate to include alternate spellings in the main article, wherever it may end up. (One book on the subject, written by Leonard L. Richards, uses "Shays's" in the title and the editorial review on the book uses "Shay's!")
So the only two correct titles are probably "Shays's Rebellion" or the "Shays Rebellion." The former is heavily preferred based on google search results, and the latter seems to be used only by US or local government sources. (Perhaps bureaucrats invented the new name because they were afraid of misusing apostrophes!) I deleted the apostrophe-after version because there is no reason we need legitimize a wholly incorrect spelling; a redirect page is sufficient in that regard.
With reference to the Dunkzela's comment on pronounciation, I can't accept the assertion that "shayz" is the correct pronunciation. Many "official" sources can be wrong. Mirriam-Webster's online dictionary uses the incorrect " Shays,' " and it's entirely possible that most teachers simply get the name wrong (or they use the government-preferred pronounciation but use one of the 2 more common spellings). Remember that for at least a century, American history teachers perpetuated the myth that Columbus "discovered" the Earth was round!
Given the nature of the actual event, I still think it's INAPPROPRIATE to accept the government's spelling for this event, and instead we should use the most popular spelling. Yet I realize there is a contradiction here: the most popular pronounciation, "shayz," would not be correct if we used what I consider the better spelling. I'd prefer to change the spelling and hope that teachers and historians would fix their pronounciation.
Howard Zinn wrote, "We must not accept the memory of states as our own." I agree and would prefer an article titled "Shays's Rebellion," but I will not move the article again unless someone agrees or we could reach a consensus. [Mr. Reznick (no user profile)]
I appreciate Mr. Resnick's research. I hadn't realized that the State Dept. was using the apostrophe-free name. I also found the Howard Zinn quote ironic, in that I recall Zinn using the "Shays'" spelling.
In reference to the pronunciation: I live in Western Massachusetts. I know how the descendents of the Regulators pronounce it. :)
Yes, that's a bit snarky of me, and I apologize. It doesn't change the veracity of the statement.
I'd also like to encourage Mr. Resnick to sign up for a free account.
- Dunkelza 11:55, 7/3/2005 (EDT)
Dukelza is correct-- Zinn uses the apostrophe-after version. No offense taken by any snarkiness... if anything, I should apologize for being so anal retentive. But I suppose attention to detail is what makes this site work as well as it does. I won't change the article again. Local information is definitely preferable, and more in concert with the idea of "what I know it..." I'll get that free account on my next wikibreak. ;-) [Mr. Reznick (no user profile)]
In looking at how other rebellions are named, you have The Dorr Rebellion, named after Thomas Wilson Dorr, not Dor's Rebellion, so I would think the proper term would be The Shays Rebellion, much like you would say The Whiskey Rebellion. Intersetingly, the news articles I've read recently on Rep. Christopher Shays a Republican calling for Tom Delay's removal have referred to his actions as The Shays Rebellion. I think the name has often evolved to Shays' Rebellion because saying the The is awkward and thus creating a possessive where one may have not been before. Growing up in Massachusetts I've mostly have heard it called shays and shayz. I've never heard it called shayzez.
-noldrin 00:24, 7/4/2005 (EDT)
Hello andy
I like the Bold text
Well, guess I qualify for old talk...if it took place in Worcester and Petersham, it took place in Central AND Western Massachusetts. Thanks!!
dumby dumby dumby
Every academic who has written a book on the subject calls it Shays's Rebellion. The guy's last name was Shays, not Shay. It's simple grammar....just because it looks funny doesn't mean it's wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.213.222.100 (talk) 02:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Annapolis Convention
I'm skeptical that the Shays Rebellion had anything to do with the Annapolis Convention, which began September 11, 1786, less than two weeks after the start of hostilities. It certainly can't have been organized that quickly. Do we have a reference or source anywhere regarding the conclusion about "lack of institutional response"? --Dhartung | Talk 19:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Huge Revision, 19 Feb 2006
Dhartung, you're correct: the linkage with the Annapolis Convention isn't legitmate at all.
I did a huge revision of this, and probably will do more, based on Leonard Richards' 2002 book on the rebellion. What was here was a very typical compilation of the various legends and outright falsehoods that grew up around the rebellion, a lot of which ended up in various town histories. Szatmary's book tended to repeat a number of those falsehoods, in addition to adding an often inappropriate class-warfare element that, while sometimes useful, tended to obscure the basic story. Dr. Richards research demonstrated quite a bit that's wrong with that history - it just doesn't stand up in the records - and I hope you can respect that this represents an effort at correcting a history that's fascinating and unusual. Take a look at Richards' book: it's highly readable and succinct.
Connor McLaughlin destroyed this rebellion not that nobody george washington!!! Talk 15:31, 19 February 2006
[edit] In regards to Szatmary's book...
I'm actually using a copy of his book right now for an essay, and I would like to know the criticisms against the book that are mentioned in the end part of this article.
I would greatly appreciate it and can be reached at Sol_of_d00m AT yahoo DOT com.
[edit] Effects
The Effects subheading in the article states that Shay's rebellion, concurrently with the Whiskey Rebellion in PA, both led Gen. George Washington to unretire and begin championing a new government. However, I am fairly certain that the so-called Whiskey rebellion took place after the ratification of the new Federal Constitution. I know for a fact that President Washington rode with Federal troops to PA to put down the rebellion and enforce the excise tax, both as a symbolic act for the new Federal unity provided for in the Constitution and also the more immediate and pressing job of collecting taxes to retroactively finance the American War for Independence as provided for in Alexander Hamilton's plan. I was fairly certain that Shay's rebellion was an isolated incident but that it sent a "wake-up call" to the cheif architects of the later Constitution and of the Articles. Please refresh my memory if I am mistaken. Kindest regards.
- You are correct that the Whiskey Rebellion was later, in 1791, according to the article. Shay's Rebellion was by far the more significant in terms of public policy. The Whiskey Rebellion was actually more of an Anti-Federalist response to the Constitution than a prelude to it. I'm not sure why the W.R. is in this article, actually.
- Shay's Rebellion was not exactly an isolated incident. Indeed, the Republic of Vermont was extant at the time and men like Washington believed that Vermont was in active revolt from their rightful state of New York (or perhaps New Hampshire). So tied together were these two "rebellions" that Shays and a number of other Regulators sought (and received) asylum in Vermont. --Dunkelza 00:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- It's worth noting that both rebellions where prompted by laws favoring the wealthy at the expense of the poor. Small distillers had to pay a higher rate than big distillers, and the farmers in western Mass were in debt because they had been fighting rather than farming. Unlike the Boston bankers and speculators, who played war profiteer at home. Katzenjammer 18:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Shays Rebellion incorrectly redirects to Shay's Rebellion which is a double redirect
Mattwolf7 15:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] It is definitely NOT "Shay's"
I'm surprised that there can even be any question about it. His name was Shays, not Shay. The standard way to form a possessive in English is to add apostrophe-s. Unless the possessor is a plural noun ending in s, in which case only the apostrophe is added. So it's cow -> cow's and cows -> cows' but ox -> ox's and oxen -> oxen's. And Shays -> Shays's. Katzenjammer 18:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I thought we'd finally gotten over the apostrophe problem. Let's just leave it as "Shays'" since that's the predominant spelling. Even Strunk & White acknowledge the use of following apostrophes in historical context. --Dunkelza 03:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Communism
Shays Rebellion article says that the farmers involved in the uprising were misrepresented as (and among the names used was the word "communists.") Communisim to my knowledge did not exist until another hundred years when Karl Marx wrote "The Communist Manifesto" in 1848) Were people called communists before that time??? djdickerson@yahoo.com
- The communism bit is a quote from a book. I'm not sure that such a large quote is appropriate and the use of "communist" is certainly an faux pas (specifically an anachronism) by the author. Can we cut down the quote or paraphrase to avoid this confusion? --Dunkelza 03:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Please, do. Msr657 17:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] restriction
Does anybody know what are the 3 restriction that came about because of Shay's Rebellion?
[edit] two links are wrong
but I don't know how to change them. The two gentlemen hanged link incorrectly to a) An antique dealer b) a senator, both in the 21st C.
Can someone correct this - and delete my message when you have done it. I was only doing a friendle visit
[edit] Quote
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." (emphasis added)
What did "manure" mean back in the 18th century? Way...manner? Jumping cheese Cont@ct 05:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
It meant fertilizer. -DWPittelli
[edit] References
Unfortunately, most of this article will have to be deleted as it is unreferenced. Trade Down 23:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
This article has very little information on the course of the rebellion itself..its all about causes and consequences.I find that a little odd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.218.175.254 (talk) 23:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)