10 Questions: Great Balls of Fire! Multiple Choice Quiz | History

Answer: It started in a bakery.

The Great Fire of London started in the early hours of the 2nd of September, 1666, in Pudding Lane, at the royal bakery belonging to Thomas Farynor (also spelled Farriner). The unofficial theory on exactly how it started is that the baker neglected to properly dampen the oven after a hard day's work. The fire spread rapidly around London, and finally ended on 6th September at Pie Corner.

Unfortunately, London had been going through a dry spell since November of 1665. Many houses in London were made of wood and thatch at that time, and some house walls were also made of lathe and plaster - both of which were highly flammable. The Pudding Lane fire managed to burn its way down to the Thames River - which was lined with warehouses, filled too with highly flammable goods.

After the fire had been merrily blazing away for a few hours, city officials (who had previously been given orders by King Charles II to reduce the fire hazard risks in London) chose to rouse the Lord Mayor of London at the time, Thomas Bloodworth. Grumbling, Bloodworth allegedly looked out of his window at the blaze - and was completely unimpressed. "A woman could piss it out," he said scathingly, before returning to bed.

How wrong Bloodworth was! The Great Fire of London lasted for four days, destroyed some 13,000 houses, 87 parish churches (including the famous St. Paul's Cathedral) and around 52 Guild Halls. The death toll was put at 16 people. However, many revisionist historians have come to question this figure, as lower class deaths were not recorded, and many people may have been burned to ashes in the blaze.

The Great Fire of London is undoubtedly one of the worst disasters in the history of Britain. The one silver lining, however, was the fact that the bubonic plague, which had been ravaging London since the previous year, greatly diminished, as many of the plague-carrying rats were destroyed in the blaze.

Answer: New York

The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, a fairly typical sweatshop of the time, was situated on the top three floors of the ten-storey Asch Building in New York City, at the intersection of Greene Street and Washington Place. Young women and teenage girls (most of them from poor immigrant families, who spoke very little English) were employed there, working long and hard hours for very little pay, along long lines of sewing machines.

If you thought that working conditions were bad, the safety conditions were even worse! There were four lifts in the building, only one of which actually worked. The doors at the bottom of the staircases that lead out onto the street were kept locked during the day. While there was a fire hose and a fire escape (a grand total of 18 inches wide), both were in a state of disrepair. Factory owners simply couldn't be bothered spending time and money on safety precautions.

While the New York City Fire Inspectors were quite well aware of the hazardous conditions, regulations were very hard to enforce, as the factory owners were rich and influential, and the common fireman was thus not too keen to risk losing his job.

On the 25th of March 1911, near finishing time for the workers of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, a fire broke out on the 8th floor of the Asch Building. No one is quite sure how the fire started, but it is likely that someone had thrown a still smouldering cigarette butt into a waste bin. Within minutes, the whole floor was ablaze. The fact that the corridors were lined with bales of cloth and rows of garments (both highly flammable materials) probably didn't help much either.

Overall, 146 out of 500 female workers died that day. Many of them, completely panic-stricken, threw themselves down the lift shaft or out of windows onto the street, rather than be consumed by the flames - one New York fireman commented that it seemed to be raining bodies. Many of the girls also burned to death, having been trapped by the locked doors at the bottom of the staircases.

In the aftermath of the disaster, a mass funeral was held for the women who had died that day, and was attended by 10 000 mourners. The owners of the factory, Max Blanck and Isaac Harris, were put on trial for 146 counts of manslaughter. Both were acquitted of all charges. The fire did, however, lead to stricter legislation regarding safety regulations in factories, and also helped the cause of the International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, who aimed to achieve better safety and working conditions for sweatshop workers.

The Asch Building survived the fire. Over the years, it was slowly refurbished, and was eventually donated to the University of New York in 1929. It currently serves as the chemistry building.

Answer: The Russian military followed a "scorched earth" policy, and thus set fire to their own city, which prevented key facilities and supplies from falling into the hands of the French invaders under Napoleon.

While some historians still question this, the generally accepted reason for the 1812 fire of Moscow is that the Russian military commanders ordered their troops to set fire to their own city - Napoleon's vanguard troops had just entered Moscow, and the Russian military wanted to destroy anything that might have been of use to the French. This was known as a "scorched earth" policy, and involved destroying anything (e.g. food, livestock, shelter, etc.) that might be of use to the enemy.

The 1812 fire of Moscow started on the 14th of September. The Battle of Borodino - the largest and bloodiest battle of the Napoleonic Wars - had just taken place, and the Russian army had chosen to withdraw from the battle and regroup, for fear of losing even more men. Following the Battle of Borodino, Napoleon's vanguard troops invaded the city of Moscow. However, by the time the French arrived, the majority of the Russian military forces, as well as the peasants, had evacuated.

However, what the French didn't know, was that before the Russian military had left the city, a certain Count Fyodor Rostopchin had given orders for anything that might have been of the slightest use to the French - warehouses, food, clothing, and buildings - to be set alight.

Soon, nearly the whole city was ablaze. It's estimated that around three quarters of Moscow was destroyed by this series of fires: over 6,000 homes, over 8,000 shops, and 122 churches.

On the 24th of September 1812, 10 Russian "saboteurs" were executed for allegedly setting fire to Moscow while the French still occupied the city. By the 18th of October, the French had left Moscow, and the reconstruction of the city began.

Alternative theories concerning the source of the fire include the suggestion that the French purposefully set fire to Moscow (although this is highly unlikely) or simply that it was just an unfortunate accident. However, the most commonly accepted view is that this fire formed part of the Russian army's "scorched earth" policy.

Answer: The British Royal Air Force (RAF) and the United States Army Air Force (USAAF)

While this may have not been a "fire" in the truest sense of the word, the subsequent fires caused by the bombs that were dropped on Dresden were undoubtedly just as murderous as the actual bombs.

Ironically, Dresden was considered to be the safest German city during the time of World War II. Before 1945, Dresden had been bombed only twice - once the 7th of October 1944, where 70 tons of high-explosives were dropped, and in which 400 people were killed; and once again on the 16th of January 1945, during which 279 tons of high-explosives were dropped.

Dresden was also one of Germany's primary cultural centres, filled with art galleries, museums, churches, and all kinds of historical monuments, such as the Zwinger and the Frauenkirche. Many Germans from the east of Germany (particularly Silesia) fled to Dresden, for fear of what the advancing Red Army might do to them.

The bombing of Dresden took place over three days. Late at night on the 13th of February 1945, over 200 British bombers attacked the city of Dresden. 500 more bombers followed thereafter. February 13th also happened to be Shrove Tuesday, and there were many celebrations happening that night in Germany; and thus there were very few German night-fighters available. Besides, by the time the bombers (the RAF and the USAAF) were spotted, it was far too late. This first raid by the Allies created a firestorm, which destroyed around 11 square miles of the city. Approximately 36 hours after the first raid, there was a second raid on Dresden by 200 American bombers.

All of Dresden was soon in flames. The fires burned for seven days and nights. It has been said that the flames and the smoke from the blaze could be seen, from 30 miles away.

Basically, Dresden was completely destroyed. No one is quite sure how many people died in the bombings. At the time of the raid, there were thousands of refugees sheltering in the city; they had been pouring into the city from eastern Germany. Since 1945 there has been much controversy about the number of people killed, and some very high figures have been suggested and have found their way into printed encyclopedias and the like. However, operational historians specializing in aerial warfare - and the City of Dresden itself - give the death toll at about 25,000 people.

It was a massacre. Dresden has remained on the conscience of the Allies for years: unlike Hiroshima, which could be "justified" as having forced a Japanese surrender and thus shortening the war, Dresden was a bloodbath. The bombing of Dresden achieved absolutely nothing.

On a lighter and more esoteric note, there was a celebrity eyewitness to the bombing of Dresden. Kurt Vonnegut, who later went on to write the famous "Slaughterhouse Five" in 1969 was a prisoner in a nearby concentration camp. He was brought into Dresden after it had been bombed to help clean up when the fires had started to die down. He described finding many unmarked dead bodies in the shells of the houses. It's thus no wonder that his novel, "Slaughterhouse Five", was a savage, black comedy and satire on the complete madness and futility of war.

Answer: Enschede

The Enschede Fireworks disaster is a fairly recent one, the blast of which was felt over 30km away from the scene; and left around 22 people dead, more than 800 wounded, and 400 homes completely destroyed. This disaster left over a thousand people homeless.

The vuurwerkramp (Dutch for "fireworks disaster") occurred on the 13th of May 2000, in an eastern city of the Netherlands called Enschede. One of the warehouses at the SE Fireworks Factory somehow caught fire. This particular warehouse stored nearly a ton of fireworks. The fire spread quickly to two adjacent warehouses and in total around 177 tons of fireworks exploded that day (and you can imagine the kind of fire that would cause).

No one is entirely sure of the source of the fire. While a man by the name of André de Vries was accused of arson, he was eventually acquitted. The fire department stated that the fire may have been caused by an electrical short circuit, or possibly even a discarded cigarette butt or match.

Answer: All of these.

There never seems to be an end to the disasters that occur in New York. The General Slocum disaster of 1904 is yet another example of one of the many tragedies that so often seem to befall this beautiful city.

The General Slocum was a passenger ferry that was used to take people on excursions around New York City. It was built in 1891, and named after a New York Congressman, Henry Slocum. Prior to the fire disaster in 1904, the General Slocum had already had a series of other accidents, including running aground twice, and colliding with another ship, the Amelia.

On the 15th of June 1904, the General Slocum was making her usual trip up the East River, along Long Island Sound, with the final destination being Eaton's Neck on Long Island. That day, the ship had been chartered for $350 by St. Mark's Evangelical Lutheran Church (situated in Little Germany, Manhattan) for the annual church picnic, which the 1300 passengers were to have at Eaton's Neck.

Somehow, a little after the ship had sailed, a fire started in a storage compartment. The source of the blaze is not certain, although it is generally believed to have been a discarded match or cigarette butt.

The Captain of the vessel, Captain Van Schaick, was ultimately responsible for the safety of both the ship and its passengers. Knowing that if he were to run his ship aground (again), he might need to refund the Church its money, he chose to ignore the danger and let the General Slocum continue her course down the East River.

Big mistake. The lifejackets and fire hoses had not been replaced in years, and did not work. Lifeboats which might have got the passengers to safety were tied up tightly, and no one could access them. Overall, 1021 out of the original 1358 passengers died that day, either by fire or by drowning.

Many acts of heroism were reported that day: nurses and patients from the island hospital swam out to save the dying passengers; a tug boat captain pulled his boat right alongside the blazing General Slocum to rescue women and children.

However, while inspiring, none of these acts of heroism could save the majority of people who died as a result of the General Slocum fire. It truly was a tragedy.

Answer: Black Friday

It's been said that there are few things more terrifying than an Australian bush fire. The hot, dry conditions make the Australian countryside a perpetual fire hazard; and the widespread eucalyptus trees, with their leaves rich in oil, don't help the situation either.

The conditions in South West Australia were ripe for a fire in the summer of 1939: it had been a long, dry, and hot summer, with temperatures above 45 degrees Celsius being recorded. Many of the creeks and rivers had dried up, and water restrictions had been imposed on the people of Melbourne.

Due to the intense heat and arid conditions, several smallish fires had been burning unattended all across the state of Victoria. Finally, on the 13th of January 1939, a strong wind fanned Victoria, and all the small fires combined into a large and deadly wall of flame.

It is estimated that the fire burned around 2 million hectares of land; completely destroyed several towns; killed 71 people (and considering how widespread the fire was, it's a miracle that more weren't killed); destroyed thousands of sheep, cattle, and horses; and affected most of Victoria in one way or another.

Considering the amount of damage that the Black Friday fires caused, it is no wonder that they are considered one of the worst bush fires in world history, and undoubtedly the worst in Australian history.

Answer: A jilted ex-army captain who had been fired from his post returned to Rome to exact revenge on Nero and the Roman people by setting a fire to the city.

No, a jilted ex-army captain did NOT return to Rome to exact revenge on Nero and the Roman people by starting a huge fire. Yours truly has clearly watched "Gladiator" a few times too many...

Most theories of how the fire was started point to the emperor of the time, Nero. Now, Rome has had more than its fair share of "mad" rulers, but Nero was undoubtedly one of the maddest. One theory suggests that he wanted more room to expand his already huge palace. Another argues that he was attempting to "purge" the city of all Christians (and all the other poor souls who happened to live with them). Some say that Nero sent men out to start the fire purely as a whim. And the worst is that, according to legend, Nero sat on the balcony of his palace singing and playing the lyre while the city blazed(Nero apparently regarded himself as quite the musician - and considering that one could be put to death for criticizing him, no one felt the need to disillusion him).

Another theory that came to light (excuse the dreadful pun) was that Christians started the fire. They were certainly the group of people that ultimately were held responsible for it. In order to take the blame away from himself, and ignoring the absence of any evidence, Nero targeted Christians, who apparently confessed to the crime (although this may have been torture induced). They suffered the most terrible tortures and executions, such as being thrown to a pack of dogs; crucified; or set alight to serve as human "torches."

Some historians claim that the fire was an accident. However, this is not a widely accepted theory, and most fingers continue to point at Nero.

Answer: 1987

Prior to 1987, the London Underground was a major fire hazard - there were only a few laws in place to control public smoking; all the escalators were made of wood; and although the escalators were regularly serviced and maintained, no one bothered to clean out the area below. Over the years, this area gradually filled up with all kinds of debris, which over time also became soaked with oil and grease from the escalator.

Sometime on the 18th of November 1987, someone dropped either a match or a still burning cigarette butt through the gap of the escalator that lead from the Piccadilly line to the main line. At around 19:50, just as the rush hour was coming to an end, smoke began drifting up from beneath the Piccadilly line escalator. And then BOOM! A huge fireball erupted from below the escalator, and, in an action that is described as being similar to a blow torch, sped up the escalator and exploded by the turnstiles at the top. Pretty soon, the whole of the crowded ticket hall was ablaze.

The fire spread very quickly, and it took over 150 firefighters to extinguish the flames. In total, 31 people were killed that day, and around 80 severely injured. Even though there had been a number of small tube station fires between the end of World War II and 1987, the King's Cross fire disaster was most definitely the worst of them.

This terrible tragedy brought about the introduction into the London Underground of modern steel escalators, which replaced the old wooden Victorian ones. It was also a major contributor to changing attitudes towards smoking in public places. Today, it is an offense to smoke in any station in Britain. London Transport realized that smoking can definitely be hazardous to your health - in more ways than one.

Answer: Mrs O'Leary's cow, who accidentally kicked over a kerosene lamp in a barn.

Truth really is stranger than fiction sometimes. Many believe that the source of the fire really was a poor cow who kicked over a kerosene lamp in the barn belonging to Mrs Catherine O'Leary.

However, in 1893, Michael Ahern, a "Chicago Republican" reporter claimed that he and some colleagues had fabricated the "Mrs O'Leary's cow" story in order to sell more newspapers. Although the start of the fire had been traced back to 137 DeKoven Street where the O'Learys lived, he claimed that they had been renting it out to the McLaughlin family, who had been hosting a dinner party that night, and therefore, the story couldn't possibly be true.

Several other theories, including that the fire was caused by a meteor shower; spontaneous combustion; a man trying to steal some milk from the O'Leary barn and in the process ignited some hay; and that some young boys were sneaking a smoke, have since emerged. And yet the legend of Mrs O'Leary's cow lives on.

The death toll is estimated to have been between 200 and 300 people, with many more sustaining injuries; and approximately four square miles of Chicago, Illinois, being burnt to the ground. It is considered to be one of the worst American disasters of the 19th century.

Thanks for playing my quiz. I hope you enjoyed it! I'd appreciate all comments that you may have. Have a lovely day!