History HubΜύ permalink
The Friday History Quiz
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Μύ
Posted by Katy R (U14748743) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Hi everyone
Today's question is:
Who was the first criminal to be captured with the aid of wireless communication?
Good Luck
Katy -
Message 2
Posted by Pugwash Trouserpress (U1865008) on Friday, 8th July 2011
That'd be Hawley Harvey Crippen
-
Message 3
Posted by Katy R (U14748743) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Congratulations Pugwash Trouserpress. Your turn
-
Message 4
Posted by Pugwash Trouserpress (U1865008) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Thank you Ma'am.
Who was the famous 'Mine Host' of a pub called 'Help the Poor Struggler'? -
Message 5
Posted by chefone (U14431437) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Heres one Katie...
What is the worlds "richest" economy....[dont look for the obvious...
]
chef... -
Message 6
Posted by raundsgirl (U2992430) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Chefone, someone had already asked a question! The person who answers one question correctly usually asks the next.
-
Message 7
Posted by nina (U14913248) on Friday, 8th July 2011
The last hangman Albert peirpiont sorry about spelling
-
Message 8
Posted by Pugwash Trouserpress (U1865008) on Friday, 8th July 2011
The last hangman Albert peirpiont sorry about spelling Μύ 'tis indeed Nina, chuck another up!
-
Message 9
Posted by nina (U14913248) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Who was Katheyn Howards first lover?? (six wife of Henry 8)
-
Message 10
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Friday, 8th July 2011
5th wife.
Beware music teachers. -
Message 11
Posted by jenny (U14149730) on Friday, 8th July 2011
"Who was Katheyn Howards first lover?? (six wife of Henry 8)"
Fifth wife - sorry to be picky (and it's so easy to lose count!!)
No idea of the anwer though - wasn't she supposed to have been seduced at the age of 15, possibly by her music teacher as indicated a bit crypticlaly above?!
Poor wretched girl - she's the one I feel most sorry for. A real lamb to the slaughter.
How monstrous Henry was! -
Message 12
Posted by nina (U14913248) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Yes sorry you are right she was the 5th wife
And yes it was -
Message 13
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Wasn't the Real Boleyn girl also supposed to have had an affair with her music teacher - or at least he was claimed to have been her lover at her trial.
-
Message 14
Posted by Minette Minor (U14272111) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Anne Boylen was accused of sex with Mark Smeaton at her trial, which seems incredibly silly to me. People would have watched them!!!!Yuck! But then again Mary Queen of Scots was also accused by the lunatic Lord Darnely of having her musicisian David Rizzio as her "lover" too, so he was stabbed endlessly and to the death in front of her when she was about to give birth to James I/VI.
What is interesting is what other charges the ONLY Boylen queen was charged with. Such as Witchcraft.... -
Message 15
Posted by Minette Minor (U14272111) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Everything takes so long here these days so to push in and jump the queue with and interesting point about Witchcraft. The last person to be accused and imprisoned for it was in 1944! She was a clairvoyant called Helen Duneau. Actually that could be Dureau, my writing is dreadful!
-
Message 16
Posted by Minette Minor (U14272111) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Incidentally does anyone know why the House of Tudor should have been called the House of Bowen? I'm some pushy Welsh broad......But it's a fact.
Unless this Board speeds up it is doomed! -
Message 17
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Friday, 8th July 2011
ap Owain, surely?
-
Message 18
Posted by Minette Minor (U14272111) on Friday, 8th July 2011
Well, ap to Welsh is what O' and Mac are to Gaelic and Urse, son of. Owain ap Meredydydd ap Twdwr, therefore Owain should have dropped his grandfather's name of Twdwr and used simply ap Meredydd. Owain ap Meredydd. This "ap" can be mutated in names so for example, "ap Evan" can become Bevan. Ap Rees, may evolve into Price and so on. Ap Owain, becomes Bowen.
Edmund ap Owain, ap Meredydd, ap Twdwr, is archaic and anglizised, the Twdwr should have been lost to the four winds and Edmund should have been ap Owain, evolving into Edmund Bowen. Ergo we should have had the House of Bowen and not Twdwr.
Wonder what David Starkey who believes that Wales and Scotland are "insignificant little countries" would make of this!? Little possibly, it simply a silly fact. Will someone speed this up? Please. -
Message 19
Posted by Minette Minor (U14272111) on Friday, 8th July 2011
I shall be forever grateful to you! Thank you Ur. The House of Bowen. But like so much to do with the un royal "Tudors" nothing is real! I truly am grateful and over to you! Fondest Cheers, Minette.
-
Message 20
Posted by Daniel-K (U2684833) on Saturday, 9th July 2011
Everything takes so long here these days so to push in and jump the queue with and interesting point about Witchcraft. The last person to be accused and imprisoned for it was in 1944! She was a clairvoyant called Helen Duneau. Actually that could be Dureau, my writing is dreadful!
Μύ
There was some discussion about this on Radio 4's Making History a few weeks ago. Strictly, Helen Duncan (your writing is worst than even you thought!) was not imprisoned for witchcraft but rather for posing as a witch.
She was charged under the Witchcraft Act of 1735. By 1735 most educated people believed there could be no such thing as real witchcraft and, thus, there could not, sensibly, be any real crime of witchcraft. Where earlier laws had assumed the reality of witchcraft and declared the practice of it an offence (and, in some cases, a capital offence), the new law tacitly denied the reality of witchcraft and made illegal the more concrete crime of the pretence of witchcraft.
The last person to be sentenced under English law for witchcraft as such was in the late 17th or early 18th century but I forget the details.
Incidentally, Duncan was not the last person to be convicted under the 1735 Act. Jane Rebecca Yorke was also sentenced under the Act later in 1944 but, for some reason, it is Helen Duncan who has entered folk memory as the last person charged with witchcraft in this country. -
Message 21
Posted by jenny (U14149730) on Saturday, 9th July 2011
" as the last person charged with witchcraft in this country."
But from what you say, she was charged with NOT being a witch! Isn't her situation the logically equivalent of, say, someone posing as a doctor when they aren't?
What's the current legal situation I wonder, given that there are a lot of soi-disant pagans/witches etc etc these days. -
Message 22
Posted by dmatt47 (U13073434) on Saturday, 9th July 2011
Whilst Helen Duncan was charged under the Witchcraft Act 1735 there is another side to the story, she had apparently discovered news about the sinking of a British ship which had not been publicised and there is a thought thatas the D-Day landings were approaching she might have some powers. Churchill asked the Lord Chancellor for a report on why such a case was being brought when London was suffering bombing. In 1951 most of the Witchcraft Act was abolished to be replaced by the Fraudulent Mediums Act 1951.
-
Message 23
Posted by mismatched (U14242423) on Saturday, 9th July 2011
Has anyone set a new question?
-
Message 24
Posted by Daniel-K (U2684833) on Saturday, 9th July 2011
Has anyone set a new question?Μύ I think we are stil on the question in M9 as no one has actually given a name yet.
-
Message 25
Posted by jenny (U14149730) on Saturday, 9th July 2011
"In 1951 most of the Witchcraft Act was abolished to be replaced by the Fraudulent Mediums Act 1951."
Hmm, this does still seem to hit the tricky issue of how would anyone know if someone were a fraudulent medium or not - ie, are there any mediums (media?) who are deemed to be non-fraudulent?
Even if it's a question of knowing intent, ie, that someone knows perfedtly well they are not a medium, but thinks it's a good way to part suckers from their money by pretending to be one, surely their best defence would be to assert that they are indeed a real medium - ie, not fraudulent.
Then again, maybe money has to change hands for it to be a crime to set up as a medium, rather than just to set up as a medium while knowing you weren't one - leaving those who do believe they are mediums, and who don't part people from their money, to operate inside the law.
Thinking about the Helen Duncan case, maybe it's a Catch 22 situation - if you PRETEND to be a witch you're comdemned for being a fake witch, and if you ARE a witch you're condemned for being a witch!
A Catch 22 code would fit in very well with the sorry history of witchcraft, as women accused of witchcraft also suffered the Catch 22 penalty that if they floated they were a with (and killed) and if they sank they were innocent (and drowned....) -
Message 26
Posted by nina (U14913248) on Monday, 11th July 2011
"In 1951 most of the Witchcraft Act was abolished to be replaced by the Fraudulent Mediums Act 1951."
Hmm, this does still seem to hit the tricky issue of how would anyone know if someone were a fraudulent medium or not - ie, are there any mediums (media?) who are deemed to be non-fraudulent?
Even if it's a question of knowing intent, ie, that someone knows perfedtly well they are not a medium, but thinks it's a good way to part suckers from their money by pretending to be one, surely their best defence would be to assert that they are indeed a real medium - ie, not fraudulent.
Then again, maybe money has to change hands for it to be a crime to set up as a medium, rather than just to set up as a medium while knowing you weren't one - leaving those who do believe they are mediums, and who don't part people from their money, to operate inside the law.
Thinking about the Helen Duncan case, maybe it's a Catch 22 situation - if you PRETEND to be a witch you're comdemned for being a fake witch, and if you ARE a witch you're condemned for being a witch!
A Catch 22 code would fit in very well with the sorry history of witchcraft, as women accused of witchcraft also suffered the Catch 22 penalty that if they floated they were a with (and killed) and if they sank they were innocent (and drowned....)
Μύ The answer to my question is Francis Dereham and he was exucted not long before her even though they had been lovers before she married the king
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Μύto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.