Talk:Dunking

Historical questions
Am I the only one who's suspicious that "supposed" witches who were dunked were "usually" killed, either by drowning or by confessing and dying another way?

While they could certainly be barbarous at times back then, it strikes me that the authorities would rationally want to have some assurance that the individual was actually a witch before killing her. --128.103.7.17 23:03, 9 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I heard in a witch documentary that they actually pulled the accused witches out if they sank before they drowned.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:11, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Dunking. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121102052605/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Dunking to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Dunking

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:08, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspect typo
from Correct typos in one click heavie->heavier? context: heavie heavie apparel. ==As punishments for scolds==[[File:Dunking crane (Schandkor

Extreme manipulation
Whomever last edited this page was obviously disingenuous. The introduction leading the article in, says that, quote: "Men did this because they're all mentally ill", end quote. What kind of wack phrasing is that in a historical article? Later, when talking about the historical aspects, a person is referred to as, quote: "A waste of oxygen, who is currently burning in hell". 2A02:AA7:4600:9295:1:1:517D:1FB (talk) 01:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Image of a woman upon a Ducking Stool
I'm a bit confused about the argument here, of a woman being dunked with the reason being "excessive arguing". Looking at the source of the image, there doesn't appear to be anything given as reason, in fact, the source states that the image is entirely unrelated to anything discussed in the book itself: "This book is somewhat of a curiosity ; it is the only one of its kind in the whole series of Chap-books, and has been several times reprinted in the country. It is illustrated, in every edition, with engravings which have no connection with the text, which, however, would be an impossible task, as the following page or so of the commencement will show. The frontispiece has nothing whatever to do with the book, but it is curious and valuable, as giving a representation of the ducking-stool."

While the image is obviously relevant, I'm unsure whether the attached caption is directly related. 82.166.100.172 (talk) 10:41, 16 February 2021 (UTC)