Archive through April 19, 2005 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Lateral Puzzles » Solved Lateral Thinking Puzzles » Solved Puzzles - May 2005 » [Rabrab] But he knows how to tie a tie » Archive through April 19, 2005 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 6:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 06:27 pm

Dracula? Unfortunately, no.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 7:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hmmm...is vampirism relevant at all?

I think I need recap to refocus my attention....my work load is finally a bit lighter!
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 8:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 07:43 pm

Hmmm...is vampirism relevant at all? No.

I think I need recap to refocus my attention....my work load is finally a bit lighter!

Good to hear that the workload is letting up! One Recap/Refocus coming up.
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Friday, April 15, 2005 - 9:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

RECAP/REFOCUS

It's only been five hundred years...

There are two men directly involved in the puzzle situation and a third who is indirectly involved. There are also an unknown and unimportant number of others present at the puzzle situation. These others are important only in that they are there; that is, that the two primary men are in company at the time of the puzzle.

The two men directly involved:

Are both "immortal"; at least, they are both extremely long-lived: the older is 2000 years old, the younger is older than 500, but younger than 600. They could be killed, but barring that, will live until they decide to die.

How they became "immortal" is relevant, and as yet undiscovered.

Vampirism, the undead, ghosts, curses are not involved. However, the supernatural/mystic is yope-ishly relevant, for a specific value of 'supernatural'. Visions and predictions are yope-ishly relevant, but tangential.

The professions of, and relationship between, these two men are both important, but as yet undiscovered. They are not relatives.

The older is a Count, and is best known by his title, not his name. He's not Dracula, though. Let's just call him the Count from here on out.

The younger is neither nobility nor a knight. Nothing more has been discovered about him.


The third, indirectly involved, man:

Was a knight, among other titles that he held.

Died in battle at the age of 43.

Died after the older immortal was born, but before the younger was.

His death had no relevance to either of them becoming immortal.

His relationship to the Count is relevant.

His profession is relevant.


Other:

There are two locations involved; the primary one (where the puzzle statement is set) is France. The other may be helpful to discover, but is not necessary for solution.

Talking to dead people is yes-ishly relevant, but needs exploration or it may mislead.
But all communication takes place between live people.

Someone has been dead for more than 500 years.

Galileo is slightly related to something that is relevant.


I think that covers it.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 4:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The younger immortal: is he a commoner? Did the Count somehow transform him from a normal human being to an immortal? If not, was the Count either directly or indirectly responsible for the younger man becoming immortal? (If yes, was it directly, or indirectly?)

The other relevant place: You said it's not in France? Is it also in Europe? If not in Europe, which other continent [insert LTPF list of continents here]?

Is the Roman Catholic church somehow relevant to this puzzle? Did the immortals view their immortality as a blessing? As a curse? Had they even wanted to become immortal? Or was it kind of forced upon them?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 8:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 04:37 pm

The younger immortal: is he a commoner? Yes. Did the Count somehow transform him from a normal human being to an immortal? If not, was the Count either directly or indirectly responsible for the younger man becoming immortal? (If yes, was it directly, or indirectly?)Any simple yes, yesish, yope, no-ish, or no to this set of questions would be badly misleading, so I'll answer the spirit of the question, not the letter:
1) The younger man would not be immortal if it weren't for something that the Count had done, however, the Count did not do this thing to the younger man.
2) The Count was directly responsible for the younger man's immortality in that he (the Count) made the means of attaining immortality available to the younger man.
3) The Count was indirectly responsible in that the younger man had to do something himself to attain immortality--the Count could not make him immortal without his willingness and assistance.
4) The younger man could not have attained immortality without the Count's willingness and assistance.


The other relevant place: You said it's not in France? correct Is it also in Europe? No. If not in Europe, which other continent [insert LTPF list of continents here]? Hmm. A quick Googling indicates that opinion is divided beween assigning it to Africa or Asia.
Either. Both. Take your pick .


Is the Roman Catholic church somehow relevant to this puzzle? Yope. Did the immortals view their immortality as a blessing? probably As a curse? Maybe once in a while. Had they even wanted to become immortal? Yes. Or was it kind of forced upon them? No.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 9:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The Middle East? Palestine/Israel? Asia Minor/Turkey? The Levant? wild hunch warning! Was the dead knight a Templar?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 9:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 09:13 pm

The Middle East? Yes! Palestine/Israel? Palestine, specifically Asia Minor/Turkey? The Levant? wild hunch warning! Was the dead knight a Templar? No, but you're OTRT
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 9:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was the dead knight a Crusader? Did he die during one of the crusades? If yes, does it matter which Crusade it was?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 9:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 09:39 pm

Was the dead knight a Crusader? Yes, among other things. Did he die during one of the crusades? If yes, does it matter which Crusade it was? He didn't die during the Crusade itself,but in another battle following his return. BUT, which Crusade he was a part of is important.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 10:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was the knight killed by a crossbow bolt?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 10:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 10:21 pm

Was the knight killed by a crossbow bolt? Why, yes, as a matter of fact, he was.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 10:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

In that case, please check e-mail, thanks :)
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 10:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 10:44 pm
In that case, please check e-mail, thanks

Yes, he was. The Knight was Richard I of England, called the Lionheart.

So we've got the Count, and the commoner, and Richard as the three relevant men. There's still plenty to sort out, though.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 11:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The commoner: was he a serf? a tradesman? a farmer? a craftsmen? something else? relevant?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 11:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 11:00 pm

The commoner: was he a serf? a tradesman? a farmer? a craftsmen? none of these something else? so yes to this... relevant? Yes, both his profession and his relationship to the Count are relevant.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 11:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When you said the Count was roughly 2000 years old, does that mean 2000 years old relative to now? Or relative to the time of the puzzle? If the latter: What century was the puzzle set [insert LTPF list of centuries here].

Was the Count French? English? German? Middle Eastern descent? Was there any ritual the Count had to go through to attain immortality? Or was it given to him by God (or an angel, or whatever)?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 11:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Monday, April 18, 2005 - 11:16 pm

When you said the Count was roughly 2000 years old, does that mean 2000 years old relative to now? Or relative to the time of the puzzle? This one If the latter: What century was the puzzle set [insert LTPF list of centuries here]. mid-18th

Was the Count French? English? German? Middle Eastern descent? Nobody knows; could be any of the first three, but not the last; could also be some other nationality. The title by which he is best known is French or a French form of an Italian title. Was there any ritual the Count had to go through to attain immortality? Yes-ish Or was it given to him by God (or an angel, or whatever)? No.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 4:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

When you said the Count was roughly 2000 years old, does that mean 2000 years old relative to now? Or relative to the time of the puzzle? This one If the latter: What century was the puzzle set [insert LTPF list of centuries here]. mid-18th

Dang...I thought I got him, but now I'm off by almost 300 years. Oh well, back to the drawing board. I'll leave the good Count alone for now and concentrate on the mostly unknown second immortal.

The second immortal: a priest? A monk? Rasputin by any chance? Was he involved with the Templars? The Freemasons? Any secret organizations?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 5:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Dang...I thought I got him, but now I'm off by almost 300 years. I'm sorry. Who were you thinking of, though? There are lots of different accounts of the good Count; some contradictory. We may be using different stories about the same man... Oh well, back to the drawing board. I'll leave the good Count alone for now and concentrate on the mostly unknown second immortal. Hokay

The second immortal: a priest? A monk? neitherRasputin by any chance? No. Was he involved with the Templars? No. The Freemasons? Possible, but unknown, and not relevant Any secret organizations? again, possible, but unknown and irrelevant
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 6:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I was thinking of Comte St. Germain, the person who supposedly is immortal until the time of Christ's return because he mocked the Christ during His journey to the cross. But that would make him about 1750 years old in the mid-eigthteenth century, not 2000 years old. Also, St. Germain's immortality came as a result of a curse, but you said that curses aren't involved.

Did the second immortal work with law enforcement? business? finance? civil? engineering? education? scientist? Something other field?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 7:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 06:37 pm

I was thinking of Comte St. Germain, the person who supposedly is immortal until the time of Christ's return because he mocked the Christ during His journey to the cross. But that would make him about 1750 years old in the mid-eigthteenth century, not 2000 years old. Also, St. Germain's immortality came as a result of a curse, but you said that curses aren't involved.

That's why I asked.
Comte St Germain is indeed the older of the immortals we're dealing with. But that's not the story that I was working from--in fact, I'd never heard him connected with "the Wandering Jew" -the name I know that story by. (The world is a very big place.) Do you want to try to chase down my variant? I don't mind telling you if you'd rather not, but it attributes his immortality to a very different reason.



Did the second immortal work with law enforcement? business? finance? civil? engineering? education? scientist? none of these Something other field? Yes.