Final Jeopardy: 16th Century People

You may also like...

9 Responses

  1. Cynthia says:

    I got F.J. answer correct. I thought what religious person was hanging out in the 1500’s. The Pope or Luther. The Pope wouldn’t give that advice. Of course, it didn’t hurt that I am a Lutheran.

  2. vj says:

    How about some other clues for 16TH CENTURY PEOPLE?

    Born in the last decade of the 15th century, his magnificent period lasted almost 46 years of the 16th century.

    This Italian noblewoman was the wife of France’s Henry II, and mother of three more 16th century French kings.

    At the age of 16, this Grand Prince was crowned the first Tsar of All the Russias.

  3. john blahuta says:

    …and to add to the “confusion”:
    for 3 years england had three “queens”:
    1. mary (teck), wife and then widow of george V.she died 1955.
    2. elizabeth, the queen mother,wife /widow of george VI. she died 2002 at the age of 101 (!) and
    3. of course elizabeth II, still going strong, very much to the frustration of prince charles.
    i DO hope though – once elizabeth should die or resign (i doubt the resigning part) that charles will renounce his claim in favor of his son, william. the british want – according to my sources- about 95% rather william on the throne than charles. especially with his wife, camilla…..
    well, i guess there is no accounting for taste. the brutal truth is that princess diane was just “used” as a “breeding stock”, and elizabeth II had very much a hand in this.
    good for the empire, a personal tragedy.
    so- i guess i did my duty for today. until tomorrow and i hope somebody slips sarah a calculator!!:)

    • vj says:

      yes, you’ve certainly done your duty :-)
      Henry VIII used most of his wives as breeding stock too. The problem in getting a male heir must have been with him. Ironic how Anne Boleyn’s daughter ruled the land far far longer than Catherine of Aragon’s. (not to mention the defeat of the Spanish Armada during EI’s reign)

      As for the betting, if I was 1st or 2nd place on this one, I would not have bet a penny. My knowledge of 16th century literature is not too shabby but 16th century people is way too broad. Not that I think Jeopardy would really make it about a pope, but there were over 15 of them in the 16th century alone.

      • john blahuta says:

        i agree. either don’t bet anything, or 2.699.00 or the 11.201.00. but the 16th century IS intimidating. on the other hand, it could have been galileo or leonardo da vinci who died in the 16th century, so he was a 15/16 century person. the thing is you don’t know usually how good your competitors are in the fj category, unless a similar category earlier in the game gives you a clue……
        well, she certainly lucked out twice. let’s see what tomorrow brings. have a good night!!:)

        • vj says:

          what different does it make to me if the other contestants are good in the FJ category “16th Century People” if I’m not?

          Looking at it as if I’m Danny with his score up against Sarah, and it’s too iffy for me — my only chance is if it’s too hard for Sarah, too, so I wouldn’t bet anything.

          If I’m Sarah with her score and I’ve got to worry about Danny but the category is too iffy for me — then I would want to hang on to every cent and hope it was too iffy for him, too.

  4. john blahuta says:

    as to the game, the second day with weird bets, yet sarah won again. sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good , i guess. not that sarah is not bright, but in the wager department…..boy, oh boy!

  5. john blahuta says:

    ….which lead eventually to the church of england and that since 1701 no catholic can be king of england (or gb or the uk), with henry VIII becoming the “supreme head of the church of england and ireland” and elizabeth I “supreme governor of the church of england”.
    the ” act of settlement of 1701″ banned “papists=catholics” from becoming monarch.
    queen anne died in 1714 with no living children, so the closest in line for the throne was the house of hanover (german spelling hannover), so george I started the house of hanover. when victoria died in 1901, her son albert edward became edward VII, establishing the house of saxe – coburg and gotha, since victorias husband was a member of that house. edward VII was however the only of that line, because in 1917 the name was changed to “windsor” because of anti-german sentiments. when elizabeth II became queen, there were attempts to change the name to “mountbatten” (german “battenburg”)since her husband was prince philip mountbatte./ however, churchill and elizabeth’s grandmother, queen mary (of teck)favored to retain the name “windsor”, so windsor it still is.
    since elizabeth’s mother was also named elizabeth ( wife of george VI) there were 2 “queens” with the same name. so she was then referred to as the “queen mother” since 1952.
    after the death of queen mary (teck) philip assumed the name windsor-mountbatten and was overheard once saying ” i am the only man in this country who can’t give his children his name”… (this is the clean version …)
    so, in fact, it is still the house of hanover, because edward VII’s mother was a hanover (victoria), although edward VII assumed his father’s name (albert of saxe-coburg & gotha) (house) and the name change to windsor had political reasons.
    a little history for those who are interested… aloha!!
    p.s.
    if you think THIS is confusing, i invite you to try and follow the ancestry all the way back to william the conqueror and before…..:)

    • john blahuta says:

      ..what happened was the closest in line for the throne who were NOT catholic were the members of the house of hanover. just a small omission at the end of line 6 of the long comment. now i really have to go…..
      take care everybody, a domani!!