Talk:Rule, Britannia!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] 1994 Welsh verse lyrics

What was the verse sang in welsh by Bryn Terfel in 1994 (as on the recording at foot of the wikipedia page for Rule, Brittania!). Was it one of the other verses in translation, or some other varient lyrics. I can't find any reference detailing it on the entire interweb, and it was surely an interesting varient. Graldensblud 23:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

It is actually a direct translation of the first verse, not the third verse as was quoted here. Clissold 10:42, 19 December 2007


In the recording, while Terfel is singing the Welsh lyrics, you can hear gasps of delight in the audience, confirmed by cheers at the end of the verse (quickly drowned out by the chorus singing the refrain). This presumably occurs as Welsh-speaking members of the audience realize with pleasure that Terfel, himself Welsh, has translated the verse into Welsh. Yet the gasps of delight only begin in the MIDDLE of the verse, not at the beginning. Can anyone explain why this is so?Partnerfrance (talk) 09:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Rule Britannia → Rule, Britannia! – Page should be under the song's actual title. Rule Britannia should exist as a redirect page.

[edit] Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • Support ▫ UrbaneLegend talk 10:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. That's the actual title of the song. JackofOz 11:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support concur with previous comment FClef 13:33, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Wiki-Ed 08:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Also concur with previous comment Hga 18:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Again - concur with suggestion Peter Shearan 05:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

This poll is now closed. The consensus was support, and the page has been moved accordingly.

[edit] Historical significance of the song

I've included a paragraph on the historical significance of the song as I am sure it evolved as a jest (it's written as a series of imperatives and in the future tense) and I think it was aimed at a continental power following an event of some importance... However, I cannot remember what the event was or which nation it was aimed at. Any clues anyone? Of course my memory could be faulty - it might not have been specific as it would annoy all Britain's imperial rivals at this time. Wiki-Ed 21:53, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The date of composition (1740) suggests that the War of Jenkins' Ear (which later merged into the War of the Austrian Succession) may have been on the composers' minds. Gdr 21:41:53, 2005-09-10 (UTC)

I think this article could do with all the diffrent versiosn, anyone agree?

[edit] Use for a general salute.

I wanted to add that a 15 sec burst of the chorus is used in the Royal Navy when making a General Salute to the First Sea Lord; as a part of a system where God Save The Queen (also in 15 secs) is used during a Royal Salute and various other tunes are used for various office-holders.

However I am not 100% certain of this, and I can't find corroberation. Does anyone else agree with me and can anyone find proof?

[edit] In 1745, Britannia Did Already Rule The Waves

The article says that "Though the Netherlands, which in the 17th century presented a major challenge to English sea power, was obviously past its peak by 1745, Britain did not yet "rule the waves". The time was still to come when the Royal Navy would be an unchallenged dominant force on the oceans ...", however this doesn't swing with my historical take (you dig?), and indeed the Wikipedia article on the Royal Navy states unequivocally: "From about 1692 until World War II, the Royal Navy was the largest and most powerful navy in the world." Maikel 19:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is what you're talking about. It's a common misconception that the words say "Britannia rules the waves". They don't. They say "Britannia rule the waves". It's not a statement of fact, but an invocation to always be the dominant sea power. JackofOz 01:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Indeed. And the Royal Navy article is wrong; I thought I corrected that a while ago but it looks like someone tinkered with it again. The claims could do with a "citation needed". Wiki-Ed 09:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The comma

Shouldn't this article be entitled Rule, Britannia!, as the first line of the chorus goes? ▫ UrbaneLegend talk 11:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I do believe you're correct. JackofOz 12:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pink Floyd song

Hello, in a Pink Floyd song you can hear the words Would you like to see Britannia rule again my friend (song: Waiting for the worms, The Wall). If someone agree that it is appropriate, we could add this in the trivia section. Don't take it too seriously, bye.  ; ) B G 01:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Laugh

I heard someone say this today. It gave me a big laugh, so I thought others might enjoy it:

  • Britannia may well rule the waves, but she will never waive the rules. JackofOz 14:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

-Hear hear! -S. Lee, Mililani HI

[edit] Lyrics of chorus: wrong?

I've just been listening to a recording of the Last Night of the Proms (HMV Classics: HMV 586794 2) on which Rule, Britannia! is sung by Norma Proctor with the Royal Choral Society. They sing "never will be slaves" not "never shall be slaves". They also don't sing "Never, never, never" as mentioned in the article: there is only one "never" but it is drawn out: "Ne-e-e-e-ever".

I've noticed this before whilst listening to the 'last night' on TV or radio and I've also seen it in printed lyrics. PurplePenny 17:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I would imagine there are different ways of singing it. A singer might be able to hold the "ne-e-e-ver", but I don't think many other people could do (hence "never, never, never"). The will/shall bit has always confused me... I think they're interchangeable depending upon who is singing it and where. Wiki-Ed 08:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
I have a copy with "never" three times, and shall instead of will. I'll put it in as variable. --Quentin Smith 11:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I've heard "Never, never, never" more than "neevverrr", but it is right to have both mentioned IMO. Same with "shall/will". Question:

Would the "Trivia" section not perhaps be better labelled "Popular culture references" since that is what it seems to be comprised of?Rlquall 13:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Year written?

The article needs to mention the year the poem was written. Right now, it only gives the year that the poem was set to music, and it is missing the year the poem was written. I don't know the year myself; can someone fill that information in? —Lowellian (reply) 05:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

At least, the way I read the intro sentence as it currently stands ("Rule, Britannia!" is a patriotic British national song, originating from the poem "Rule, Britannia" by James Thomson, and set to music by Thomas Arne in 1740.) it seems to say that the poem was set to music in 1740, but the sentence structure and the comma seem to imply that the poem was written in a different year. If that 1740 refers to both the year of writing and the year the poem was set to music, the intro sentence needs to be rewritten to make that clearer. If the year of writing is not the same as the year the poem was set to music, the year of writing needs to be given. —Lowellian (reply) 05:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the wording might be deliverately weasely because the author doesn't know the answer - I belive this is because it is not known. I think it was written - from its wording - around the same time, but I don't recall ever having seen a date on the poem itself. Wiki-Ed 21:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


Does this song have any relation to the defeat of the spanish armarda at all? because i have been lead to belive so in history studies.

[edit] Contradiction

A previous contributor had inserted a template that didn't exist, so I changed it. The contradiction stands though - the article says that the Jacobites seized upon the song and wrote anti-Jacobite words to it, which seems like a strange thing to do. -- Mithent 23:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] As leitmotif in American popular culture

I have heard this song my whole life as a leitmotif in American popular culture for all things U.K. I am surprised that this reasonable observation was deleted. If we want to get into citation issues, the whole article is uncited. Charles T. Betz 02:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

You are correct in that the article is largely unsourced at the moment. Until recently it did not have much more than the words, but people have been adding snippets here and there and now it looks a bit scruffy. I have no idea where their sources are, but they do link to other Wikipedia articles. I think your addition probably belongs in the "other uses" section. Wiki-Ed 09:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I have done so. Charles T. Betz 12:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lyrics

I added a couple of citataions from the OCM. I was going to add a citation for the lyrics and turned to my Palgrave's Golden Treasury...but find there are some differences: "Britons never will be slaves and "And manly hearts to guard the fair" (my bolding). Palgrave is publishing it as a poem, not a song so, for example, the chorus is "Rule, Britannia! rule the waves!" (without the repetition needed for the song). Any suggestions as to which source we quote as the definitive lyrics? Bluewave 14:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Now also checked Oxford Dictionary of Quotations which agrees with "will be slaves" so maybe the article is wrong? Bluewave 14:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anthem?

I've always thought this would be a better anthem than God Save the Queen - boring, generic, no real mention of anything British and shared with other countries as a royal anthem (Australia etc), compared with this which is rousing and interesting. Is there a reason why it is not? It's about the same age, if not older, than the current one. Would it ever get changed? 212.108.17.165 09:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

For some reason I'm given to understand the Queen is quite fond of God Save the Queen, so she is unlikely to suggest changing it. However, the lyrics to God Save the Queen are actually linked to historical events (Marshal Wade etc), whereas Rule! Britannia doesn't actually mention anything specifically British. So I disagree with you there. However, in any case, it's not official (in legislative terms). As to a change in the future, well maybe, but who can say. I would be surprised if a national vote on the subject selected this one over Land of Hope and Glory though. Wiki-Ed 10:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if it's a good idea to add the term "Cool Britannia" to the See also section. What do you think?

[edit] Cool Britannia

I wonder if it's a good idea to add the term "Cool Britannia" to the See also section. What do you think? Iakd87 00:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Mermaid

I am confused about the relation of the "imperial" and the "mermaid" versions. A google search yields conflicting results, presenting the "mermaid" lyrics either as "traditional", or as an alternation to Thomson's lyrics by Mallet. dab (𒁳) 10:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Never will or never shall?

Maybe it's my hearing, but I've always heard the words "Britons never ... shall be slaves", not "never will be slaves". Is it just me, or is this a recognised variant of the words? -- JackofOz 04:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to "will" on the basis that this is the version of the words in the original masque and in Palgrave's Golden Treasury and the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations. I agree that it sounds a bit odd, but these are all reliable citable sources and I suggest they should be the starting point for an encyclopedic article.Bluewave 09:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Bluewave. There seems to be plenty of evidence on Google that "shall" is sung pretty commonly. It may not be the words in the original poem, but it's what is actually sung these days. I think this deserves some mention in the article. -- JackofOz 09:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Christopher Hitchens says the song is connected with the attacks by the Barbary pirates on the Cornish coast - in which many Cornish folk were taken as slaves to Algiers in the 18th century. Can anyone verify this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.240.38.29 (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)