Wednesday, April 22 is Earth Day. This year’s theme is Our Power, Our Planet with an emphasis on the daily actions that support our planet, an orb that floats in the darkness of space.

The Earth Day Revolution

On December 7, 1972 Apollo 17 astronauts on their way to the moon captured an image of earth that became the symbol Earth Day. Now called the Blue Marble, the iconic photo taken 28,000 miles away from planet Earth depicts a fragile planet surrounded by the darkness of space.

Two years before, Senator Gaylord Nelson created Earth Day as a way to force environmental issues into public discourse. The Blue Marble demonstrated what was at stake. There is only one planet Earth.

“My primary objective,” Nelson remembered, “was to show the political leadership of the nation that there was broad and deep support for the environmental movement.” [EPA Journal]

On that first Earth Day, 20 million Americans, demonstrated against the impact of 150 years of industrial development. Those demonstrations were a response to environmental factors that could no longer be ignored.

In 1962, Rachel Carson published Silent Spring to raise awareness of the link between pollution and public health. Specifically, Carson stressed the hazards posed by pesticides, particularly DDT, which could kill hundreds of different species – insects, birds, and mammals, including humans. 

Scientists developed DDT in 1939. Its first major application was to clear South Pacific islands of insects that could cause malaria. It was also used as delousing powder. In 1945, the war was over, and DDT was available for civilian use.

Carson’s book described how DDT entered the food chain, how it remained toxic in the environment, how it harmed animals and the world food supply. Silent Spring became an unlikely bestseller. As a child, I remember watching crop-duster biplanes fly over agricultural fields next to the highway. In middle school, I read Silent Spring and wondered about the air I breathed that day.

Years later, as if to stress the environment’s fragile balance, two major events captivated public attention.

On January 28, 1969, Union Oil’s Platform A near the Santa Barbara coast had a blow-out. Within 10 days 80-100,000 barrels of crude oil spilled into the Santa Barbara Channel and onto the beaches of Santa Barbara County. At the time, it was the largest oil spill inAmerican history. Approximately 3500 sea birds as well as dolphins, elephant seals and sea lions were killed. Public response resulted in numerous pieces of environmental legislation.

That summer the surface of the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland caught fire at a time when the public was watching. The Cuyahoga River was the site of various industries. The economy was booming though the river was polluted, and its surface was usually covered in oil slicks.

On June 26 an oil slick on the river caught fire and burned for half an hour. The fires were so common, no one thought much about it until Time magazine and National Geographic both published articles. The Cuyahoga River became a symbol of industrial pollution.

Earth Day & Environmental Legislation

The publicity surrounding these incidents and public outrage led to legislation to protect the environment, continuing public interest in the issue, and that first Earth Day in 1970. 

In 1969 Congress passed a National Environmental Policy Act requiring all federal agencies planning projects that would impact the environment to submit Environmental Impact Statements.

By 1980 Congress had passed the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, Resource Conservation & Recovery Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and established the Environmental Protection Agency. Congress also banned the use of DDT and leaded gasoline.

In 1990 President Clinton awarded Senator Nelson the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his leadership in founding Earth Day.

Environmental research and a better understanding of climate change and its effects led to the Paris Climate Agreement signed by 196 nations in 2016. The signatory nations pledge to reduce the rise of the global surface temperature. The United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement in 2020, returned to it in 2021, and withdrew a second time in 2026.

Fifty-four years after Apollo 17 astronauts shared the photo that became known as the Blue Marble, an astronaut on Artemis II took this photograph of earth appearing behind the moon. In 1972 the Blue Marble inspired people to see our earth as a fragile planet surrounded by the darkness of space. If we don’t stand together fighting for the environment of our vulnerable earth, this photo may come to represent mankind’s greed as darkness covers our planet.

Care for our environment is everyone’s responsibility. Our Power, Our Planet.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

The Blue Marble taken Dec 7, 1972 by an Apollo 17 astronaut; First Edition Cover of Silent Spring; Crop Duster Bi-Plane over Imperial Valley Farms, 1972; Union Oil Platform A; The Manitowoc Sailing up the Cuyahoga River, 2025; Environmental Protection Agency poster: Environment + Economy = A Win-Win, 2014; Photo by Artemis II astronaut of Earth from the dark side of the Moon. The Story of Silent Spring. NRDC. Aug. 13, 2015. Lorraine Boissoneault. The Cuyahoga River Caught Fire at Least a Dozen Times. Smithsonian Magazine. June 19, 2019. Gaylord Nelson. “Earth Day ’70: What it Meant.” EPA Journal.

If you would like to be notified about out my blogs as they appear, sign up for my newsletter. In addition to the link to my latest blog, the newsletter includes news about my writing and publishing.

The post Earth Day: A Revolution for the Environment first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

In the early 20^th century, the emerging field of Home Economics gave educated women an opportunity to become professionals within a respected field of expertise. As new electrical appliances became available in the early 20^th century, home economists became responsible for training housewives in their use. Home economists could translate technical knowledge into every day language and show women how to apply it. 

I have mixed thoughts about the emergence of home economics as a field. They probably stem from the home economics classes I had to take in middle school. While boys learned woodworking and tried not to hit their fingers with hammers. Girls learned to set a table properly and make white sauce without lumps. I’m sure the classes must have had other topics, but those are the ones I remember. The recipe for white sauce, by the way, first appeared in the 1950 Betty Crocker Cook Book. Milk, flour, butter, seasonings, and lots of stirring. Not surprisingly, learning to stir white sauce didn’t teach me any technical knowledge. But enough about my culinary disasters.

The problem women had in the early 20^th century was that, in general, women were considered to be less intelligent than men. Pioneers in the home economics discipline believed that with proper technical skills, women could prove their intelligence and gain respect without crossing male boundaries by, for example, attending chemistry classes.

Home economist Marion Talbot spent most of her career at the University of Chicago where in 1912 she created the Department of Household Administration. The topic of Sanitary Science had previously been a coeducational program housed in the Department of Sociology. But with Talbot’s innovation, the topic was reserved for women only.

“Home economics is the best subject yet found to teach the power of things,” Talbot said. “It is humiliating to be conquered by things.” Talbot and other leaders in home economics believed that as women gained scientific knowledge about food, cleaning, and efficiency, they could make informed decisions for themselves and their families.

Catherine Beecher said much the same thing in 1872:
“The care of a house, the conduct of a home, the management of children, the instruction & government of servants, are as deserving of scientific treatment and scientific professors and lectureships as are the care of farms, the management of manure and crops, and the raising and care of stock.”
But Beecher’s thoughts didn’t found a new academic discipline.

The mantra of the American Home Economic Association established in 1908 was that for women to improve their position, they must follow expert advice from home economists and denounce tradition. And yet, most women continued to perform the same domestic tasks as they did before, albeit with more modern design principles.

Mary Pattison observed in her Principles of Domestic Engineering published in 1915, “our hope is to bring the masculine and feminine mind more closely together in the industry of home-making by raising housework on the one side to the plane of scientific engineering, and by proving on the other, fuller individual returns for every complete and right domestic activity.” And yet, as this 1927 illustration demonstrates, male and female roles remained much the same.

Iowa State College became the first college to offer an undergraduate Bachelor of Science program in the study of household equipment. Between 1930 and 1955, Iowa granted 308 BS degrees. The school followed up with a master’s degree program that taught women how to understand and repair equipment. Both programs proved women could fully understand the new household technology.

Graduates of this and other collegiate programs found positions with utility companies and appliance manufacturers. In 1935, Betty Melcher who worked at Buffalo General Electric, observed “If Mrs. Jones swears she can’t bake a cake and threatens to throw her range out, it is my job to prove to her that she can and incidentally sell her on keeping the range.”

Of course, Betty didn’t need a home economics degree to sell electric ranges. But without it, she had no credentials for the job. In 1949, a woman without a degree in home economics couldn’t possibly know anything about how the new electric ovens worked, or teach middle school girls how to stir a white sauce. And if women and girls didn’t know these things, they would be as ignorant as the greater culture assumed.

It wasn’t until the second wave of feminism that young women had a choice denied to the founders of home economics. In 1960, women were six percent of doctors, three percent of lawyers, and less than one percent of engineers. In 2022, 37 percent of doctors and 15 percent of engineers were women. In 2024, 41 percent of lawyers were women.

Women have broken out of the domestic cage, and have choices Catherine Beecher never imagined. From my perspective, that’s progress. No stirring required.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Ladies Home Journal, 1948; Home Economics Class at Goshen College, 1948; Vacuum cleaner Advertisement, Saturday Evening Post, 1920; Marion Talbot, 1911; Title Page for Beecher’s The New Housekeeper’s Manual, 1873; Country Gentleman, 1927; Electric Stove, 1949; College of DePage President Dr. Ann Rondeau by COD Newsroom, 2018. Glenna Matthews. “Just a Housewife”: The Rise & Fall of Domesticity in America. 1987. Barbara Spindel. “The Secret History of Home Economics Review: Engineering the Everyday.” Wall Street Journal. May 2, 2021.

If you would like to be notified about out my blogs as they appear, sign up for my newsletter. In addition to the link to my latest blog, the newsletter includes news about my writing and publishing.

The post Home Economics & Modern Domesticity first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

This is my second of blog celebrating Women’s History Month. The commemoration gives us many opportunities to cheer women’s achievements. Often, however, the ordinary activities of women’s lives are, if not overlooked, at least unsung. It is impossible to consider women’s history without noting women’s activities in the home, the often invisible work space where women have spent much of their time. Historically, thoughts on household activities were confined to middle class white women who had not only their own homes to look after, but also the education and training of household servants.

In the early American Republic (c.1790-1830), women were praised as Republican Mothers and Angels of the House. Their well-ordered homes were sanctuaries from the stresses men faced on a daily basis, a source of love in a cruel world. Beyond that, women were the custodians of civic virtue who upheld the morals of their husbands and children. Both roles were crucial to establish a model American Republic of domestic tranquility.

However, as Abigail Adams had warned, in exchange for their invaluable service to the young nation, women lost their separate identity at the time they married. With few exceptions, many women could not sign contracts, let alone vote. Married women could not own property. Children belonged to their fathers.

In 1841 Catherine Beecher, an unmarried minister’s daughter, published A Treatise on Domestic Economy. The book made Catherine a household name and gave her an independent identity and income. Catherine built on the model of Republican Motherhood to assert that only women’s efforts in the home could prevent society from fragmenting under the pressure of industrialization, immigration, and growing cities with their noise and dirt. Catherine believed that if women gave up efforts to actively participate in civil society, they could claim their rightful place as society’s moral leaders in education and philanthropy. Catherine emphasized that by creating well-ordered homes, women could hold society together.

Catherine’s vision of a well-ordered home was a structure that by today’s standards seems like more than a full-time job. The housekeeper aka wife must be knowledgeable about health, nutrition, cleanliness, appropriate clothing, exercise, manners, orderly habits, charitable giving, and able to supervise domestic workers. And everything must be done efficiently which is why Catherine included instructions for building houses and arranging work spaces, including this plan for laundry and food storage rooms. No detail can be overlooked, including locations for the ice closet which is next to the linen closet and the laundry area with its own stove.

You cannot make women contented with cooking and cleaning, and you need not try. — Ellen Swallow Richards

Ellen Swallow Richards is generally viewed as the founder of the discipline of Home Economics, a profession that welcomed professionally trained women scientists into its ranks while uplifting women who were still trying to figure out how to prepare nutritious food. She and her disciples explained to middle class women that thanks to improvements in science and efficiency, they can provide a healthy home for their families with such efficiency that not only could they forgo the necessity of servants, but also have time for themselves. But the women must be diligent in their efforts.

Ellen herself was a highly educated woman. In 1868 she entered Vassar College to study astronomy, receiving her bachelor’s degree two years later and embarking on a quest for a Master of Arts degree, which she also received after writing her thesis on her chemical analysis of iron ore. Armed with academic degrees, Ellen applied for several positions as a commercial chemist, but no one would hire a woman in such a masculine field.

Disappointed but undeterred, Ellen applied for admittance to the school that became the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was admitted as a special student. The designation made it clear that MIT would not open general admissions to women. It also meant Ellen did not have to pay tuition. In 1873, Ellen received a bachelor of science degree. For the next five years Ellen taught chemistry and established a Women’s Laboratory without a salary or official academic appointment.

In 1875 Ellen married Robert Richards, chair of the MIT mining & engineering department. MIT graciously allowed Ellen to continue volunteering her academic services and also to donate $1000 annually to further women’s scientific education. [Note: One thousand dollars in 1875 was the equivalent of about $29,568.36 in 2013.] Ellen developed a curriculum stressing chemical analysis, industrial chemistry, mineralogy, and applied biology.

Ellen decided that the best way to provide a career for other women scientists and to allow women to pursue interests outside the home was to apply basic scientific principles to the home with an emphasis on nutrition, food safety, appropriate clothing, physical fitness, sanitation, and efficiency in carrying out household tasks so women could pursue interests outside the home. Ellen Richards had the same basic approach as Catherine Beecher, though whether the two women would agree is difficult to say. Ellen would probably argue that her academic qualifications outranked Catherine’s thoughtful advice. In 1882 Richards published The Chemistry of Cooking and Cleaning: A Manual for Housekeepers. The Chemistry of Cooking sounds so much more official than A Treatise on Domestic Economy, even if both authors had the same goals of efficient households and women who could turn their talents to social problems in the greater society.

To Produce and Perpetuate Perfection—or as Near to Perfection as may be Attained in a Household

Just in time to spread scientific ideas about domestic economy, the first issue of Good Housekeeping Magazine appeared on May 2, 1885. In its early years, Good Housekeeping published numerous articles on food safety and food adulteration. In 1888, an article discussed candy contaminated with pulverized asbestos, and in 1902 there was an article about formaldehyde in infant formula, milk and cream.

As the century turned, running a household was becoming complicated. Some of the confusion was due to the increasing amount of household equipment powered by electricity. But a more powerful challenge was changing domestic expectations as professional women carved out a career path for themselves and their sisters. What would this new world look like?

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Liberty in the form of the Goddess of Youth by Mabel Brady Garvan Collection 1796; The Artist & His Family by James Peale 1795; Floor Plan of Laundry & Food Storage Rooms from the New Housekeeper’s Manual 1873; Ellen Swallow Richards between 1890 & 1900; From the Boston Cooking School Magazine 1896; Good Housekeeping Cover by John Cecil Clay 1908. Glenna Matthews. “Just a Housewife”: The Rise & Fall of Domesticity in America. 1987.

If you would like to be notified about out my blogs as they appear, sign up for my newsletter. In addition to the link to my latest blog, the newsletter includes news about my writing and publishing.

The post Women’s Roles: From Republican Motherhood to Scientific Household Management first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

Women’s History Month begins March 1. It’s a month designated to celebrate women’s achievements, talents, history, and aspirations. A month in which women’s efforts to achieve economic, social, and legal can be highlighted. So, it seems fitting to take a moment to highlight the timeline of events that led to this month with its focus on women.

The idea that women contribute to the historical record, have a history as valuable as the history made by men, and deserve the same legal and economic rights as men has always been an extremist one.

In 1776 Abigail Adams wrote a letter to her husband John who was attending a congress to discuss American independence from Britain while she remained at home running their farm and raising their children. I long to hear that you have declared an independency, she wrote, and by the way, in the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies, and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could.

A sentiment to which John responded, As to your extraordinary code of laws, I cannot but laugh.

It wasn’t until the early 20th century that Americans slowly saw women’s legal status change.

The Socialist Party of America organized the first Women’s Day on February 28, 1909 on the one-year anniversary of the 15,000 women who marched across New York City demanding shorter hours, better pay, and the right to vote. In 1913 socialists in Europe and America declared March 8 as International Women’s Day, a date that continues to be observed.

The 1913 postcard on the left explains the reason women wanted to vote: For the work of a day, For the taxes we pay, For the laws we obey, We want something to say.

The American campaign for women’s right to vote began in 1848 and proceeded on a state-by-state basis until August 18, 1920 when the 19^th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified. Two days later the Secretary of State signed the proclamation granting American women the right to vote. A mere twenty-eight words marked the beginning of change in women’s legal status. “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.” The amendment did not, it should be noted, remove systemic impediments that prevented American citizens from voting. Neither did it change the legal or social status of women. The struggle for equality continued.

Fast-forward fifty years. In 1971, Congresswoman Bella Abzug of New York introduced House Joint Resolution 52 to designate August 26 as Women’s Equality Day. The resolution stated, in part, that Women’s Equality Day is a symbol of women’s continued fight for equal rights, and, that the president is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation annually in commemoration of women’s suffrage.

In 1978 the Celebration of International Women’s Day morphed into a Women’s History Week. Nine years later, in 1987, the National Women’s History Project petitioned Congress to pass Public Law 100-9 to designate the entire month of March as Women’s History Month.

“If they don’t give you seat at the table, bring a folding chair.” — Shirley Chisholm

In 1968, Shirley Chisholm began her first term in the United States Congress. She was the first African American woman to serve in Congress, and in 1972 became the first woman and first African American to seek nomination as president of the United States.

During her tenure in Congress, Chisholm championed racial and gender equality, fought poverty, and opposed the war in Vietnam. In her later years, Chisholm said, “I want to be remembered as a woman who dared to be a catalyst for change.”

Women’s History Month is a time to remember the courage and accomplishments of women from all walks of life. Today’s blog is the first of three blogs for Women’s History Month. The movement to establish Home Economics as a profession is the topic of my next blog. And the last will touch on the social trend of trad wife, a movement based in current social media.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

We Can Do it by J. Howard Miller 1942; Abigail Adams by Benjamin Blyth 1766; Votes for Women Postcard c1913; Bella Abzug, 1970s; Shirley Chisholm, 1972. Women’s Equality Day. National Women’s History Museum. Aug. 26, 2013. Debra Michals. “Shirley Chisholm.” National Women’s History Museum. 2015.

If you would like to be notified about out my blogs as they appear, sign up for my newsletter. In addition to the link to my latest blog, the newsletter includes news about my writing and publishing.

The post March is Women’s History Month first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

On December 16, 1773, about 100 Sons of Liberty disguised themselves as Mohawk Indians and boarded three English merchantmen carrying a cargo of Bohea tea. The Americans used hatchets to open the 342 chests of tea and dumped a total of 92,000 pounds of tea into Boston Harbor to protest the Tea Act of 1773. The tea was valued at £9,000, or $1.7 million in today’s currency. The British were, understandably upset with Bostonians, and relations became tense.

Why did a tax on tea ignite so much resistance?

On the surface, the Tea Act doesn’t seem to have had malicious intent. The British Parliament passed the Act to give the East India Company a monopoly on the sale of tea, and undercut the price of the tea Americans smuggled into their colonies.

But it was more, because the struggle over taxation rights had been going on for almost twenty years. Delegates at the Stamp Act Congress of 1765 declared that “it is inseparably essential to the freedom of a people, and the undoubted rights of Englishmen, that no taxes should be imposed on them, but with their own consent, given personally, or by their representatives.” Parliament repealed the Stamp Act in 1766, and replaced it with the Townsend Acts.

The Townsend Acts of 1766 and 1767 included indirect taxes on glass, lead, paints, paper, and tea. Americans vigorously protested the right of Britain to tax them when no American was a member of Parliament. Eventually, Parliament repealed the taxes, except the tax on tea. Parliament wanted the colonies to know, in no uncertain terms, that Parliament had the sole authority to tax the American colonies.

“No Taxation Without Representation”

In 1789 the recently independent American states ratified the United States Constitution. At the time, Benjamin Franklin famously declared that

Our new Constitution is now established, and has an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.

Indeed, the United States Congress divided into the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.” [Article 1, Section 8]

And also All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. [Article 1, Section 7] Thus, Americans were represented in Congress through their representatives, and since representatives served two-year terms, voters would be able to remove a representative if he did not represent their interests.

On July 4, 1789, President George Washington signed the first tax law of the United States into law. The Tariff Act of 1789 required foreign ships (i.e., British or French ships) to pay a 50 cent per ton duty on all shipping, whether manufactured or raw products, that were delivered to American ports. American ships delivering the same goods paid 6 cents per ton. [Note: In 1789 $1.00 was worth $36.83 in 2013.]

The average American didn’t notice the tariff’s impact. Moreover, the federal government was still quite small and didn’t require a great deal of revenue.

The First Tax on Income

Americans didn’t have a tax on their personal income until 1862 when President Lincoln created a Commissioner of Internal Revenue. To pay wartime expenses, Americans were taxed 3 percent on incomes between $600 and $10,000, and 5 percent on incomes over $10,000. [In 1862 $1 was worth $32.09 in 2013.]

Most Americans never noticed the new tax on income, but those who did, objected to it. In 1872, Congress repealed the income tax. Between 1868 and 1913, 90 percent of government revenue came from taxes on liquor, beer, wine, and tobacco. This was potentially problematic since the government was much larger than it had been in 1789. 

In 1909 President Taft recommended a constitutional amendment giving the federal government the power to tax incomes. Supporters of the amendment thought an income tax was a better method to collect revenue than tariffs. In 1913, Wyoming ratified the 16th Amendment to the constitution, and it went into effect, giving Congress the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived.

Since then, it’s fair to say, income taxes have increased steadily. The Revenue act of 1918 imposed a progressive income tax to support the war effort.

And The Revenue Act of 1942, sometimes called the Victory Tax, was the most comprehensive and progressive tax in American history. For the first time, 75 percent of American workers paid a tax on their income. And to reduce the burden of coming up with a lump sum when the tax came due, the government required employers to withhold money from tax payer wages. Of course, if too much money was withheld, the IRS would refund the overage. By the time the war ended in 1945, 90 percent of American workers filed income tax forms.

My investigation into the history of American taxation with representation has enabled me to procrastinate on the process of actually completing my tax return. If you feel grumpy about taxation, remember that through your representative, you have a voice in the taxation process. It may not be a loud voice, but at least you don’t have to dump 342 chests of tea into the nearest body of water to get the federal government’s attention. You can vote.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Destruction of Tea at Boston Harbor by Nathayel Corrier 1846; No Taxation Without Representation, Clipart Library; Burning of the Stamp Act, Boston, 1903; Benjamin Franklin 1789 by Joseph-Siffred Duplessis & Jean-Francois Janinet; George Washington by Gilbert Stuart 1796; Civil War Envelope; The Fresh Cow by Charles Lewis Bartholomew, c1913; Detail from Two Tax Collectors by Marinus van Reymerswaele 1540s. Beverly Bird. “A Brief History of Taxes in the U.S.” Investopia. Sept. 3, 2025.

If you would like to be notified about out my blogs as they appear, sign up for my newsletter. In addition to the link to my latest blog, the newsletter includes news about my writing and publishing.

The post Americans & Taxation first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

Valentine’s Day is almost upon us. A day associated with hearts, flowers, candy, and (if you are a certain age) a fancy “date” at a nice restaurant. But my clearest childhood memory of Valentine’s Day is those chalky Valentine heart candies. Strangely enough, the small candies still exist. And, as is the case with candy corn at Halloween, people either like them or hate them. 

It all began in Boston in 1847. Pharmacist Oliver Chase had a problem to solve. At the time, pharmacists compounded their products into various forms, including powders (sometimes sold as wafers or cachets), pills, or tablets. Customers, however, preferred to ingest their medications in the form of lozenges, and they particularly liked lozenges as a remedy for sore throats or bad breath. Unfortunately for the pharmacist, producing lozenges was labor intensive and involved the use of mortar & pestle to process the ingredients, kneading a sugary dough, rolling out the dough, and then cutting the dough into small discs.

Chase invented a lozenge cutter that could be pressed into the dough to create uniform discs. The cutter was probably a hand operated machine similar to this cutter from 1874. Press link here. Chase’s invention eventually led to his induction into the Candy Hall of Fame, because his machine made the commercial candy industry possible.

Oliver’s brother Silas was the first to recognize that the new cutter could be used to produce candy, and the brothers opened the New England Confectionary Company to produce what they called Chase Lozenges, later changing the name to NECCO wafers. [Remember those?] NECCO wafers tasted good, had a long shelf life, and were affordable. According to legend, civil war soldiers included the wafers in their knapsacks.

In 1866, another brother, Daniel, designed a letter stamping system that allowed phrases to be stamped onto larger candies shaped like scallop shells. These became known as conversation candies. Phrases included “How long shall I have to wait? Please be considerate.”

Smaller heart-shaped candies first appeared in 1902 and were a hit. The candies also could be used for games. At a Boston party in 1911, guests found their partners for the evening through the candy hearts which were broken in half. Each young lady received half of a heart. Young men had to find their candy match. Presumably a good time was had by all.

In 2010, NECCO decided to try new recipes, and replaced the banana and wintergreen flavors with green apple and blue raspberry. Other flavors included cinnamon, lemon, orange, lime, and chocolate. The traditional texture also changed from chalk consistency to one that was softer and chewer. Not only that, new phrases appeared. Instead of the familiar Be Mine, I’m Yours, or Kiss Me, the words Tweet Me or Text Me appeared. Consumers were not amused. Sales fell, and in 2018 NECCO went bankrupt.

The Spangler Candy Company purchased NECCO in 2018, but was unable to supply the Valentine market in 2019. Today production is back on track, and the Spangler Candy Company makes about 600 million conversation hearts annually. Other candy makers, including Brach’s, also make the sugared heart. In 2023, the National Retail Foundation estimated that Americans spent $28 billion on candy for Valentines, though much of that was probably spent on the many other varieties of sweet treats available in heart shaped boxes.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Butterfly Valentine, 1940s/50s; Interior of Stylish Pharmacy, 1825, Wellcome Collection; Necco Hub Wafers Hoarhound Lemon Drops Ad, 1916; Necco Wafers, Information of New Orleans; Necco Sweathearts, Public Domain. Erin Blakemore. “A Brief History of the Conversation Heart.” Mental Floss. Feb 2, 2024. Gabby Romero. “The Sweet History of Conversation Hearts. Delish. Jan 29, 2024.

The post Be Mine, Valentine first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

As cats are always happy to demonstrate, the simplest container or bit of string or laser light can bring hours of frenzied enjoyment. Now that we are two weeks into a new year, I must admit that I find my enthusiasm for simple pleasures increasing. And what could be simpler than chasing a frisbee? Notice I specified “chasing,” not “catching.” But I digress.

In case you haven’t thought much about tossing frisbees lately, a frisbee is a plastic, oval shaped disc that can be tossed. A flick of the thrower’s wrist sends the disc spiraling towards a person, or a dog, who attempts to catch it. This simple activity is why the frisbee has outsold every toy except the oldest historical toy — the ball. Balls have been around for over 3,000 years. The official frisbee has been around since 1957, but the first recorded use of “flying ovals” was in 1871.

The First Frisbie

That’s not a typo in the heading. The first Frisbee was actually called a Frisbie after the Frisbie Pie Company. According to this origin story, William Frisbie opened the Frisbie Pie Company in Bridgeport CT in 1871 to sell pies. Nearby colleges, particularly Yale, were among his customers. The students enjoyed the pies, and after eating the pies, they enjoyed tossing the empty pie tins to each other. When a student let go of the pie tin, he yelled, “Frisbie.” If the origin story ended here, throwing Frisbees might have never become a national pastime.

From Popcorn Lids to Cake Tins: The Prototype

In 1937 Walter Frederick Morrison, a 17-year-old high school student, spent Thanksgiving with his girlfriend’s family. After the meal, Lucille introduced her boyfriend to a family game called “flipping.” Players tossed the lids from tubs of popcorn. The lids could glide in a flat, curved, or boomerang trajectory. Unfortunately, the lids didn’t hold their shape, and once the lid was dented, it didn’t fly very well. Undaunted, Walter replaced the popcorn lids with cake pans.

One day, Walter and Lucille took their cake pans to the Santa Monica beach. After a few games, someone approached them and asked if they would sell the cake pan for 25 cents. A pan only cost a nickel. Walter quickly realized he had a good business opportunity, and began selling Flying Cake Pans for a quarter each.

Frisbees by WHAM-O

In 1955 Walter sold his invention, now called the Pluto Platter to Wham-O, and on January 23, 1957, the same year the hula hoop was invented, Wham-O produced the first “modern” Frisbees. This month marks the Frisbee’s 69th birthday. You don’t see hula hoops much any more, but frisbees are everywhere.

Wham-O released their new toy, called the Frisbee Disk in 1958. Company designer Ed Headlock made a few improvements by adding so-called rings to the surface to stabilize flight. Wham-O marketed frisbee playing as a new sport. More games using frisbees were soon invented, including one of the most popular games: Frisbee Golf. Players throw the frisbee at a target from a teeing area. The course has up to ten holes. The game is so popular there is an International Disc Golf Association.

Just as popular is Ultimate Frisbee, called Ultimate because the name Frisbee is still under copyright with Wham-O. Ultimate is a non-contact international team sport governed by the World Flying Disk Federation. The sport is played in 103 countries and was under consideration for the Los Angeles 2028 Olympic Games. In 2022, Ultimate was removed from consideration for the 2028 Olympic Games.

Tossing frisbees has become like throwing a football in the backyard after Thanksgiving dinner or shooting hoops by the garage: an enjoyable pastime overshadowed by professional sports.

The frisbee was part of the first class inducted into the National Toy Hall of Fame in 1998. Other members of the inaugural class were the Barbie doll, Erector Set, Teddy Bear, Hula Hoop, Crayola Crayons, Etch-A-Sketch, Monopoly, Tinkertoy, Play-Doh, Marbles, and Legos.

I started this blog thinking about “simple pleasures.” Turns out frisbees aren’t as simple as I thought. There’s a definite skill set involved, and no-doubt very focused players. But the image of tossing a plastic disk to another person for no reason except enjoyment still stirs my imagination.

Why I’m Still Blogging

For those of you who enjoy statistics, this is my 16^th year of blogging and my 535^th blog. I enjoy writing blogs, because when I’m in the middle of a writing project, putting together a blog gives me a different focus and a sense of completion. This year’s post will continue my whimsical investigations inspired by my research, travels, and items that simply catch my eye, like frisbees, for example.

If you would like to be notified about out my blogs as they appear, sign up for my newsletter. In addition to the link to my latest blog, the newsletter includes news about my writing and publishing.

The Life & Times of Sarah Good, Accused Witch

Now Available as an Audiobook Narrated by Christa Lewis

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Cat in a Box by Lucus; Russell Terrior by Hynek Moravec; Frisbie Pie Tin by Doug Coldwell; Velina Plays Frisbee at the Beach by Velinassecretsnoflake; Wham-O Company Logo by dnh52; Wham-O Frisbee, Public Domain; Disk Golf Scottish Open 2007 by Conor Lawless; Ultimate Player Catching Frisbee by BecAM12; Frisbee Spielen in Meer by Sobot by Arquus. “50 Years Later, Frisbee Still Flying High.” The Virginian-Pilot. May 27, 2007. Troy Brownfield. “The Surprisingly Complicated History of the Frisbee.” The Saturday Evening Post. Sept. 10, 2021.

The post Playing Frisbee: From Pie Tins to International Sports first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

When I first encountered this 1907 Thanksgiving postcard, I thought it was a fanciful parade of turkeys. But the drawing is rooted in the reality of bringing turkeys to market.

My lack of knowledge about food sourcing was not and still is not that unusual. Growing up, the closest I came to any understanding of food sourcing came from watching Rawhide, a television series featuring stories around drovers bringing cattle herds up the Sedalia Trail from San Antonio to Sedalia, Missouri.

Turkey drives had a similar purpose: bringing turkeys to market.

By the early 19th century, turkeys were a common source of food. The birds hatched in the spring and were ready for slaughter in the fall. A single turkey could, with side dishes, feed an entire family, making turkeys an economical source of food on the farm. Some farms specialized in raising turkeys with one or more farms coming together to herd their turkeys to urban markets.

In the early 19^th century, drovers herded thousands of turkeys in flocks of 7,000-10,000 birds. Vermont turkeys walked to Boston; Kentucky and Tennessee turkeys traversed to Richmond, and some birds ambled between Missouri and Colorado.

The roads were bad, the journey long, and the birds didn’t always make the wisest choices. Before the turkeys set out on their journey, farmers took steps to protect their feet. Some marched them through tar and then sand to adhere protection onto their somewhat fragile feet.

On the march with the turkeys were drovers, a wagon with corn for the turkeys and supplies for the drovers, and older children who often scattered corn so the turkeys would stay on the pathway.

Flocks of turkeys walked about 1 mile an hour, and could cover about 10-12 miles before they stopped for the night. Hazards along the way included mountains the birds had to climb and bodies of water they had to cross, usually in the air. Drovers had to keep the birds from crowding together, so they didn’t trample each other. And the flock had to be kept calm in order to avoid a stampede. Drovers used long poles topped with a red cloth to keep the fowls on track.

If darkness fell at any point — be it cloud cover, a rain storm, a covered bridge, or the sun setting — turkeys flew up to settle down for the night and roost. Weighing about 20 pounds each, the turkeys clustered together, often breaking tree branches or collapsing roofs.

Once the turkeys arrived at their destination, they might be marched into the town marketplace, or in later times, directly to the slaughter house. Turkey season began at the end of October and continued into January.

The Life & Times of Sarah Good, Accused Witch

Available at Your Favorite On-Line Book Sellers

Illustrations & a Few Sources

Turkeys on a Road, 1907; Thanksgiving from Harpers Magazine 1858; Thanksgiving Card with Two Turkeys. Andy Wright. “Back When Your Thanksgiving Turkey Walked Hundreds of Miles to Market.” Atlas Obscura. Nov. 23, 2016.

The post Turkey Drives first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

Once again, Americans have turned back time. By the time this blog officially launches on November 3, 2025, it will all be over. Americans will have changed time at 2:00 a.m. local time Sunday,  November 2.

Wait — What?

You mean you didn’t know we could control time? Benjamin Franklin suggested the concept in 1784 when he lived in Paris serving as the American ambassador to France.

Franklin observed in a somewhat satirical essay published in Journal de Paris that if Parisians adjusted their sleep schedules to rise earlier, they would need fewer candles and less lamp oil, which would save them money.

“Your readers, who with me have never seen any sign of sunshine before noon, and seldom regard the astronomical part of the almanac, will be as much astonished as I was, when they hear of his rising so early; and especially when I assure them, that he gives light as soon as he rises. I am convinced of this. I am certain of my fact. One cannot be more certain of any fact. I saw it with my own eyes.”

The idea didn’t catch on.

Until, There Was Standard Railroad Time

To understand how Daylight Saving became a national mandate, we need to take a step back into the 19^th century. Prior to 1883, time was a simple matter. When the sun reached its highest observation point, it was noon. Of course, the sun can be fickle about its appearance. Sometimes, for example, there is cloud cover. And, the sun shines slightly differently in Boston, Massachusetts than it does in, for example, Charleston, South Carolina. Which meant that when it was noon in Boston, it was 11:43 a.m. in Charleston. At the time, it didn’t seem to matter, because it was unlikely a person in Boston would have a noon appointment in Charleston.

Except that railroad networks in North America were expanding, and differing local times made it impossible to compute accurate timetables. Enter Sandford Flemming, chief engineer of the Canadian Pacific Railway. In 1878 he suggested dividing the entire world into time zones. There would be 24 meridians; each meridian would be 15 degrees away from the next meridian, creating a time difference of one hour.  On November 18, 1883, most railroads in the U.S. and Canada began operating on Standard Railroad Time in four different time zones: Eastern, Central, Mountain, and Pacific. 

With a few adjustments, the Interstate Commerce Commission introduced legislation to Congress, and on  March 19, 1918 Congress passed the Standard Time Act.

Daylight Time

At that time [pun intended], the U.S. was involved in World War I, and looking for ways to conserve resources. In 1916 Germany and other European countries involved in the war had introduced the concept of Daylight Time to reduce expenditures for electricity and coal. On March 31, 1918 the U.S. followed their example and introduced Daylight Time. Of course, the amount of daylight in a given day remained the same. But moving the clock forward reduced the number of daylight hours people would still be sleeping, and increase the hours they would be awake. Thus reducing the need to generate electricity for light and use coal for heating.

Despite the patriotic reasoning, changing time twice in the same month must have been unnerving. If you can’t count on time, what can you count on? Farmers, in particular, argued that changing clock time didn’t change when cows needed milking, chickens needed feeding, or crops needed harvesting before the day heated up. Under public pressure, Congress ended Daylight Time after the war was over. The United States continued on Standard Time until the next major war.

War Time

In an effort to reduce electricity usage that was higher in winter than summer, President Roosevelt introduced War Time, previously called Daylight Saving, on February 9, 1942. The president noted Lost Ground Can Always Be Regained – Lost Time, Never! and admonished Americans to Avoid Time Off, Avoid Time Out, and whatever you do, Don’t Slow Up The Ship!

Congress repealed War Time the last Sunday of September 1944. But unlike the change in 1919, many states and cities continued to enact daylight saving, and created a patchwork of time zones.

Uniform Time

In 1966, Congress passed the Uniform Time Act and returned the control of time to the federal government. In 1967 Standard Time became mandatory for all states, and Daylight Time was mandatory from the last Sunday in April through the last Sunday in October. States were allowed to opt out of Daylight Time, which Arizona promptly did (excepting territory occupied by the Navajo Nation). Today Hawai`i, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands also remain on Standard Time.

Most recently the Energy Policy Act of 2005 stipulated the present calendar dates for Daylight Saving beginning on the second Sunday in March and ending the first Sunday in November. The map at right indicates regions that alternate between standard time and daylight time in blue, and those that do not in orange.

Is the matter settled? No. Every spring and every fall the debate over the pros and cons of daylight saving continues. Statistics from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine show that about 63 percent of Americans would like to stop saving daylight, particularly since not that much energy is saved. Lighting uses less overall energy than it did a hundred years ago, and increasing daylight hours only serves to encourage people to use either more air conditioning or heating, depending on the weather.

AVAILABLE FOR PRE-ORDER

The Life & Times of Sarah Good, Accused Witch

AMAZON

Illustrations & a Few Sources

You Can’t Stop Time; Benjamin Franklin by Joseph Duplessis, about 1785; The Sun; Sandford Fleming by John Wycliffe Lowes Forster 1892; Time Zones of U.S. 1913; Poster Issued by United Cigar Stores Company 1918; Don’t Slow the Ship, NARA 1942/3; Map of Daylight Savings in U.S. 2023. “Did Ben Franklin Invent Daylight Saving Time?” The Franklin Institute. Sleep Experts Want To Stop ‘Springing Forward’ to Daylight Saving Time. American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Ian R Bartky and Elizabeth Harrison. “Standard and Daylight-saving Time.” Scientific American. Vol. 240. No. 5. May 1979. 46-53. Veronique Greenwood. “The Dark Side of Daylight Saving Time.” Time. Nov. 1, 2025.

The post YOU CAN’T STOP TIME, BUT YOU CAN CHANGE IT first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

Halloween, once called Samhain, is nigh. In two weeks costumed children, as well as adults, will pass through neighborhoods or decorated trunk-or-treat parking lots with dulcet cries of “Trick or Treat.” 

Halloween is the modern iteration of Samhain [pronounced SOW-wen] a Celtic festival that begins at sundown October 31 and continues into November 1. As customs changed over time, Samhain divided into Halloween and All Saints Day, with Halloween keeping up with ancient traditions. About this time last year, I posted a blog focused on Samhain. And my blog two weeks ago looked at the custom of bobbing for apples.

There are spiritual aspects to Samhain. One story reveals that the Sun God dies at Samhain and departs to prepare for his rebirth at Yule. The god’s death insures his people will live. After the Sun God dies, the Lord of Misrule takes his place, giving light without warmth in the winter months. Sometimes the Lord of Misrule is said to symbolize the power of looking at life from a different perspective.

Goddess Cerridwen

Goddess Cerridwen rules over transformations, rebirth, and inspiration. Every goddess or god has a role to play, even if it’s just to provide explanations to the inexplicable. A 16th century manuscript by Elis Gruffydd recounts one of the legends about Cerridwen and her progeny. Is it positive or negative? You be the judge.

Ceridwen and her husband Tegid Foel lived near what is now Bala Lake in North Wales. The couple had two children: a beautiful daughter, Creirwy, who was full of light and life, and an ugly, ill-tempered son call Morfan. Ceridwen wanted give her son wisdom and poetic inspiration to compensate for his appearance. So, Ceridwen used her magical cauldron and mixed a potion.

The mixture had to boil for a year and a day. Obviously, Ceridwen had other things to do, so she employed a blind man named Morda to tend the fire beneath the cauldron and a young boy named Gwion Bach to stir the mixture.

Now there was a secret to the potion. The first three drops of the mixture would grant the recipient wisdom and poetic inspiration. The rest of the potion was poisonous.

Just as the mixture was almost ready, Gwion had an accident. Three drops of the hot liquid fell onto Gwion’s hand. The lad put his burned hand into his mouth, thus gaining the wisdom intended for Morfan. Gwion knew he was in trouble and ran away. Ceridwen realized what had happened and chased him.

Using the power he received from the potion, Gwion turned himself into a hare. Ceridwen became a greyhound and chased him. Gwion dove into a river and became a fish; Ceridwen became an otter and swam after him. Gwion became a bird and flew away; Ceridwen became a hawk and hunted Gwion with a fierce determination. Finally, Gwion came up with the idea of turning himself into a single grain of corn. How could the goddess find him amongst the many kernels of corn scattered everywhere? Ceridwen became a chicken scratching amongst the kernels until she found Gwion and ate him.

You might think the story ends here, but no. When Ceridwen became pregnant, she knew the growth within her body was Gwion assuming another shape, and decided that when she gave birth, she would kill him.

But when she saw the babe, he was perfect, and Ceridwen could not carry out her intention. Instead, she sealed the child inside a leather skin bag and threw him into the ocean. Eventually, the bag washed ashore where a prince named Elffin ap Gwyddno rescued the babe and took him home. When the infant grew up, he became a famous poet known as Taliesin.

Time passed, and either Creirwy or Morfan had a child. The king, Tepid Foel, held a banquet with the best quality of food, wine, and entertainment to celebrate his first grandchild.

As the wine flowed, the harp player heard a small voice saying, “Vengeance will come.” As he looked around, he saw a bird watching him and followed it outside to the top of a hill overlooking the town. As the harpist listened to the bird sing, he fell asleep. When he awoke, the town and palace were submerged under a great lake and his harp floated on the surface.

It is said that if you walk near the edge of Bala Lake, you can sometimes hear a quiet conversation.

First Voice: Vengeance will come.

Second Voice: When will it come?

First Voice: In the third generation!

COMING SOON!

The Life & Times of Sarah Good, Accused Witch

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Bats, Haunted House, & Full Moon by Alexas Fotos; President George W. Bush on Halloween at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. 2006; Lord of Misrule 1887; Ceridwen by Christopher Williams; Print by J. E. C. Williams in the book ‘Y Mabinogion, 1901; Polygon illustration of hen’s head; Sculpture of Poet Taliesin in Pennal, Wales; Welsh Chaffinch by Holly Victoria Norval; Bala Lake by Mick Garratt. The Birth of Gala Lake. Amgueddfa Llangollen Museum. Samhain Lore. Angelfire.

The post Halloween Stories first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

Fall officially began last month, but October is the month I always associate with the changing of the seasons from summer activities to those that announce Fall and the Harvest Season has arrived. Deciduous trees paint the horizon in warm colors before swirling to the ground. Halloween preparations are underway, and black cats are understandably nervous as witchy images fly on magical brooms. In some places, hayrides under a full moon are an activity hearkening back to earlier times.

Bobbing for Apples

Bobbing for apples, however, is a custom often overlooked in modern times. For one thing, the activity is potentially messy if the apple tub is too full of water.

Ripe apples are symbol of fall abundance, but the custom of retrieving an apple from a tub of water with one’s teeth, or using said teeth to separate an apple from a string seems a bit far-fetched. So, here’s the story behind this autumn activity.

Bobbing for apples is a custom that stretches back to our Celtic and Roman cultural ancestors. At the end of October, Celts celebrated the festival of Samhain. Participants lit large bonfires and tied apples to evergreen branches.

The Celts believed apples were a symbol of love, fertility, divination, and magic. And it became a custom for young people to try and bite into an apple that was either floating in water or hanging from a string as part of a matchmaking game in which the first one to bite into an apple would be the next person allowed to marry.

Meanwhile, the Romans had autumn customs based around the goddess Pomona who ruled over orchards and harvests. When the Romans arrived in Briton, their customs merged with Celtic traditions.

Apples & Courtship

There were various apple bobbing customs. In one, the apples had young men’s names on them, and young women took turns trying to snag the apple with the name of a preferred partner.

• If she snagged the apple on her first try, the relationship was off to a good start.
• If she snagged it on the second try, sparks would fly but the relationship would fizzle out.
• If she tried a third time and snagged the apple, it wasn’t worth the trouble, because no relationship would blossom.

In the Irish game of snap-apple, players lunged at apples hanging from strings. Single men and women competed to determine who would marry next. The first to snag an apple would marry soon. In the painting above, lads in the foreground bob for apples while the ladies in the back may be trying to snag a hanging apple.

How to Bob for Apples

In contemporary games, most often at Halloween parties, five or more apples are placed in a shallow bowl of water which is just over half full. Players take turns, using only their mouths to dunk their heads in the water, bite an apple, and remove it from the tub. The player with the fastest time wins.

Snagging an apple with your teeth can be tricky. The stem is the easiest part of the apple to bite, as the illustration on the left demonstrates.

Some say the trick is to use your face to push the apple to the bottom of the hopefully shallow tub or push it to the side. Either method may provide enough leverage to make it easier to snag the wet fruit.

I think I’ll skip the bobbing this year, and wait for the pie.

Uncle Wiggily’s Apple Roast

Uncle Wiggily is an elder rabbit whose adventures in Woodland are the subject of a 1919 children’s book. In this excerpt, Uncle Wiggily is at a Halloween party.

Nurse Jane Fuzzy Fuzzy, the nice muskrat lady housekeeper, brought in a tub full of water. It was set in the middle of the room and some apples were floated on top of the water, like toy ships.

“You may duck first for an apple, Jackie,” said Uncle Wiggily to the little puppy dog chap.

Jackie knelt down by the tub and put his front paws behind his back. For it isn’t fair to use your paws when you try to catch a floating apple in your teeth.

Just as Jackie was leaning over the tub, his brother, Peetie, slyly gave him a push and Jackie’s head went under the water.

“Now Peetie, you mustn’t play any more tricks on your brother when he is trying to bite his apple,” said Uncle Wiggily, after Jackie had been dried off from the apple tub.

“No, I won’t touch him!” said Peetie, and then Jackie got hold of his apple in his teeth.

The apples were swinging by long strings, and it is hard to bite one unless you use your paws or your hands. But that isn’t allowed. Sammie Littletail was banged in the eye and Johnnie Bushytail on the nose. But it was lots of Halloween fun!

Illustration from Uncle Wiggily’s Apple Roast , 1919

Uncle Wiggily’s Apple Roast, or How Nurse Jane’s Pin Cushion Fooled the Skuddlemagoon and Uncle Wiggle’s Hallowe’en Party. Also How He Helped Jack Frost. Text by Howard R. Garis. Illustrations by Lang Campbell. 1919.

COMING SOON!

The Life & Times of Sarah Good, Accused Witch

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Witch riding a broomstick with a black cat, 1908; Hayride, Port Dover 1919; Apple Bobbing, 1950; Bonfire sparks by TwilightLillez; Pomona & Cupid by Gaspar Peeter Verbruggen the Younger; Snap-Apple Night by Daniel Maclise, 1833; Halloween Pleasures, 1911; Drawing of apple pie, 1886. “Why do we bob for apples on Halloween?” Irish Myths. Alison Richards. “The Secret, Steamy History of Halloween Apples.” NPR. Oct. 31, 2013.

The post Bobbing for Apples, An Autumn Tradition first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

The so-called Green Man motif, like the one on the left, is often found in medieval grotesques. An ancient symbol of rebirth, the Green Man is linked to spring, and earlier gods of the forest. Most generally, the Green Man is surrounded by leaves or branches.

This Green Man lives in York Minster, beneath the kings on the Quire Screen. And though surrounded by what looks like foliage, his color is gilt, not green.

Nearby, there is a companion carving also covered in gilt. To my eye, this figure has a feline countenance. This type of grotesque has almond-shaped eyes, and an open mouth. It also has hands with which to grasp the foliage.

Unlike the grotesques in the Chapter House, and carvings elsewhere in the Minster, these figures give a glimpse of the original sculpted figures that were once brightly painted.

The Chapter House at York Minster

The Chapter House at York Minister is a unique structure for several reasons, one of which is its distinctive ceiling. In particular, there is no central column holding it up. The vaulted ceiling is supported by painted wooden timbers. How so? Timber is a lighter weight than stone, and can support the roof with the weight transferring to columns between seven stained glass windows. Exterior buttresses against the exterior walls help distribute their weight.

Beneath the stained glass windows, there are forty-four seats for the canons of York Minster. Each canon can look across the open space with an unobstructed view of their colleagues. [Whether he can actually see his fellow clergy is another matter.]

Medieval canons with wandering minds could look at the jeweled stained glass, or up to the vaulted ceiling. They could also look at the grotesque sculptures near each seat. Over 200 individual stone portraits of men, women, and beasts reveal a kaleidoscope of facial expressions and behaviors. The mouth on the woman above, for example, is covered. Did she talk too much? Or perhaps she had a tendency to gossip.

The Chapter House Grotesques

In many ways, grotesque figures are archetypes illustrating various themes. Scholars once attributed the fact that so many grotesques are clutching their mouths to mean toothaches and other dental problems were rampant. Given the state of dentistry, they probably were, but there are other possible explanations. The usual name given to these figures is “mouth-pullers.” And the behavior of the figure on the right with one hand tearing out his hair, and the other near his mouth is an illustration of Anger, or Wrath — one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

The chap on the left seems to have other issues. Note his look of consternation, or is it revulsion, with his the wrinkled brow, horrified eyes, open mouth, and a seemingly complete set of teeth.

There are also faces screaming in terror. This fellow on the right stares forward with horror, his mouth (with another set of good teeth) is open in shock or pain. And who can blame him for his surprise? He has a creature sitting on his head with its claws extended into his scalp. Ouch! Beastly grotesques are said to indicate a chaotic life energy which may explain why the winged beast looks as horrified as his host.

A wide open mouth with a protruding tongue is said to be a symbol of devouring giants. But who is the chap on the left consuming? He too has a good set of teeth.( At this point on my voyage of grotesque discovery, I did a search on the symbolism of teeth. One site suggested teeth can manifest “emptiness,” and transience. Not very cheerful, but I thought I’d share the possibility.)

Did the canons zone out from meetings by contemplating horror, doom, & gloom? Did they muse on the possibility of their dire future existence in hell? Were their thoughts consumed by worry about a mythical bird sitting on their heads, clawing out their eyes, and pecking on their respective noses? Was it always a case of man pulling himself out of the abyss? If so, perhaps the canons should pay attention to the topics under discussion and keep their eyes on heaven.

Happily, there are a few carvings of folks who experience some happiness, such as this couple on the right who seem nervous but content.

There are also monkeys who seem to giggle at whatever sight they are viewing. This is not a good sign, since monkeys symbolized man’s folly and vanity. Perhaps they are not the best figures to emulate, but compared to other sculptures, they have a certain charm.

Dogs also have a friendly vibe. I’m not sure what this one holds in his mouth. It looks a bit like a fish to me.

Dogs, monkeys, bears and other animals were viewed as lower than humans who were expected to exhibit a higher standard of behavior.

In the Chapter House, the sculptures may have been put above each seat to create an opposite to each occupant. In all things, there had to be a balance of good and evil. If one carving was a benign figure, there had to be an opposite carving to instill a fear of falling into evil.

So for every depiction of what might be innocence, such as the young man on the left, there must be another who will pay an agonizing price for choosing the wrong path. Indeed, the fellow on the right looks as if he’s repenting as the winged figure digs its claws into his scalp.

Incidentally, the grotesques were not the monochromatic figures they are today. Originally they were painted in colors as bright as stained glass which must have made them appear all the more realistic.

COMING SOON!

The Life & Times of Sarah Good, Accused Witch

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Chapter House Ceiling by Michael D. Beckwith. Chapter House Windows by Paul Hudson. Chapter House Interior by Tilman2007. All other photos by Author. “York Minster.” Britain and Britishness. “York Minster Chapter House.” Historiette. Feb. 17, 2022.

The post Chapter House Grotesques at York Minster first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

Over the years, I have visited York Minster many times. And I always see something unexpected, like this chap on the left. It seems uniquely appropriate that a creature such as this should be restrained by fencing in the Stonemasons’ Yard.

The wide-eyed creature with pointed ears clutches his head while a frog crawls out from under its sharply pointed teeth. During medieval times, frogs represented demons. And demons, as people knew then, were fallen angels.

This particular frog’s eviction doesn’t necessarily seem voluntary, but the frog appears to experience less pain than its host.

The creature’s body has a humanoid appearance. In its left hand, the creature holds a fish, a medieval symbol of Christianity. The sculpture’s message might be that Christ has evicted the creature’s demons.

The next question a viewer might have is who, or what, this unhappy creature is. The statue is what is known as a grotesque, a word Dictionary.com translates as an ugly, or comically distorted figure, creature or image. If the sculpture contained a drainage spout, it would be called a gargoyle.

This particular grotesque was designed to replace a statue on one of the York Minister buttresses that has been worn down by wind and rain. The original carving is how a shapeless blob of stonework. Its condition might be even worse than the illustration at right.

In recreating the creature, Lewis Morrison selected the theme of good and evil: frog and fish. He and his associates hand-carved the half-ton figure from 1,510 pounds of local limestone that was probably taken from a quarry near Tadcaster.

Once in place, no one on the ground will be able to see this mythical creature as it stands, a silent sentinel of cosmic struggle.

There has been a Stonemasons’ Yard at York Minster since the 18th century. The work of restoration is a never-ending and expensive process supported by individual, private and public donations. The present stoneyard established in 1914, is being transformed into a Center for Excellence.

The Doom Stone

The York Minster grotesques seem almost benign in comparison to the Doom Stone, presently housed in the crypt.

The stone dates back to the 12th century Norman period. The figures are difficult to see. The limestone has eroded, and the paint is reduced to small chips. It may be part of a larger sculpture, or perhaps not.

Whatever its original intent, the Doom Stone is about the pathway to damnation. The man in the upper left carries bags of money to symbolize greed.

The well-dressed woman in the upper right personifies lust. All the figures are being pushed into a cauldron at a lower level of hell. The cauldron itself is supported by two demons and two devils. At the bottom, toads clean the nostrils of a central face.

External Grotesques & Gargoyles

A plethora of grotesques decorate York Minster’s exterior.

Female and male, they sit on the exterior edges in contemplation.

A craftsman emerges from the stone with his chisel.

A snake appears to be wrapped around this man who may be consuming something he shouldn’t.

The last picture in our gallery is an intricately carved couple lounging above 17th century funerary monuments. The viewer can see the woman’s facial expression, her intricate hairstyle, her jewelry and fashionable clothing. Sadly, her partner appears to have “lost his head;” the woman appears to be grasping at his cowl. He, too, is well-dressed, wearing his sword on his right side and dagger on his left. Who were they? Where did the gentleman leave his head? And why did the woman keep her head while the man lost his? Alas, it is unlikely we’ll ever know.

[Note: Many statues in the nave lost their heads during the 16th century reformation. But this carving is in the north quire aisle.]

COMING SOON!

The Life & Times of Sarah Good, Accused Witch

Illustrations & A Few Sources

All Photos by Author. Roff Smith. “Here’s How You Sculpt a Medieval Statue in the 21st Century.” National Geographic. Feb. 4, 2025. Tim Barber. “York Minster’s Sinister Doomstone.” Real Yorkshire Blog. Sept. 23, 2022.

The post York Minster Grotesques & Other Carvings first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

Today Judith Leyster (1609-1660) is one of the best known Dutch female painters of the 17th century. But it was not always so. After her death, Leyster’s work fell into obscurity, often attributed to Franz Hals. But, Leyster signed her work with a distinctive monogram of herself with a start shooting towards the right. It’s a small talisman, but in 1893 after the Louvre acquired one of her paintings attributed to Franz Hals, scholars noticed Leyster’s monogram and began looking at other paintings attributed to Hals.

In comparison to the artists profiled below, Leyster painted about life with portraits of musicians, tavern scenes, and views of domestic life. Leyster was the first woman in the Netherlands to become a master painter, a title she received in 1633 after being admitted to the Haarlem Guild of St. Luke. With this recognition, Leyster was able to open her own studio and accept students.

Maria van Oosterwijck

Many artists took a more somber look at the world around them. The painting on the left is the Vanitas Still Life, created by Maria van Oosterwijck (1630-1693) in 1690. In the 17th century, vanitas paintings reminded viewers that worldly pleasures were essentially useless, since death came to everyone. The images of transient flowers, in this case roses, tulips and irises, conveyed the sense that life is fleeting. And, should the audience require further proof that the allegory applies to them, there is the skull at the center of the picture. A Bible rests on the marble table. Additional symbols are the sunflower which represents God, and the floral wreath surrounding the skull—a crown of righteousness that God will bestow on individuals after death. I’m not sure if the sunflower and the wreath were supposed to provide comfort to viewers. Perhaps. The sensibilities of 17th century Dutch people differed from ours.

The paper slipping over the side of the table contains the key to the painting, with biblical references. As an example, the skull is connected with Romans 5:12 “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” Maria’s father and grandfather were both ministers, and she herself was very religious.

Maria van Oosterwijk was a famous for floral still lives. Her paintings could be found in the collections of Emperor Leopold I, Louis XIV, and William III. Maria was an anomaly for her time. She never married, though she did raise an orphaned nephew. During her life, Maria produced 30 paintings, including this self-portrait with a palette and brushes representing her profession, and a Bible to demonstrate her piety.

As part of its commitment to include more female artists in the Gallery of Honor, the Rijksmuseum purchased Vanitas Still Life in 2023 from a German collector for $1.4 million.

The Amsterdam Pallas

Rachel Ruysch (1664-1750) painted The Still Life with Flowers in a Glass Vase shown on the left. A prolific artist known throughout Europe, Ruysch commanded prices as between 750 and 1200 guilders per painting when Rembrandt’s fees averaged 500 guilders. Johann Wilhelm, the Elector of the Palatinate in Germany, made Ruysch his official court painter, but allowed her to reside in Amsterdam as long as she sent him one painting annually.

Ruysch grew up in a family of artists. Her father Frederick Ruysch was a prominent botanist. Ruysch combined both skills with her still lives, and incorporated flowers not often seen in the Netherlands in her work.

In 1693 at the age of 29, Ruysch married Juriaen Pool, an Amsterdam portrait painter, eventually giving birth to ten children. Unlike most female artists, she continued to paint after her marriage, signing her own name to her work. In 1723, Ruysch won 75,000 guilders in a lottery, and briefly slowed her artistic production.

Ruysch and her husband joined the Confrerie Pictura in The Hague in 1701. She was the first woman to be admitted and remained a member for 20 years.

Ruysch collaborated with Michael Van Musscher, a portrait painter, to create what might be called a self-portrait. Ruysch contributed the floral arrangement to Van Musscher’s picture of an artist in her studio. The album of floral studies in the foreground invites the viewer to compare the two works of art.

These three artists were not the only women who painted in the Dutch Golden Age. Maria Sibylla Merian, Magdalena van de Passe, Clara Peeters, Maria Schalcken, Anna Maria van Schurman, and Alida Withoos also entered and thrived in the crowded field of art in the 17th century. At a time when most artists were male, these women made their own place.

? ? ? ? ?

Sandra’s Books: Sea Tigers & Merchants. Ambition, Arrogance & Pride. Saxon Heroines. Two Coins. Rama’s Labyrinth.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Self-Portrait by Judith Leyster; Judith Leyster Signature; Jolly Drinker by Judith Leyster; The Serenade by Judith Leyster; Vanitas Still Life by Maria van Oosterwijck; Portrait of Maria Van Oosterwijck by Wallerant Vaillant; The Still Life with Flowers in a Glass Vase by Rachel Ruysch; Rachel Ruysch in her Studio by Rachel Ruysch & Michiel Van Musscher. Katie White. “Rachel Ruysch’s Impossible Still Lifes Outsold Rembrandt.” Artnet. April 16, 2025. Richard Widdington. “Long Forgotten Dutch Artist Finally Claims Her Spot in the Rijksmuseum. Artnet. June 3, 2019. “Women Artists of the Dutch Golden Age.” National Museum of Women in the Arts.

The post 17th Century Female Artists at the Rijksmuseum first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

The Gallery of Honor in the Rijksmuseum leads the visitor so unerringly to Rembrandt’s Night Watch that the paintings displayed in its alcoves are easily overlooked, if not for guides who point out the paintings she or he finds most worthy of notice. Paintings by Johannes Vemeer, for example, have many more viewers pressing towards their framed canvases than more prosaic group portraits of charitable organizations or the works of once famous artists who are now overlooked.

Frans Hals’s Marriage Portrait of Isaac Massa & Beatrix van der Laen (1622) is well-known, but not a crowd pleaser. I, however, find it endearing. As indicated by his clothing, Massa was a successful merchant. In 1622, Massa married a burgomaster’s daughter. Hals’s painting is not simply a wedding portrait, but a story in itself. The couple seem quite pleased with themselves, for reasons revealed in the picture’s symbolism. To the bride’s right, is a symbol of the garden of love. On the groom’s left is an eryngium thistle, a symbol of conjugal fidelity.

The couple’s clothing demonstrates their material success. The Dutch enjoyed wearing colors, but in portraits of the upper classes, the sitters invariably wore black, because black was the most expensive dye available. Thus, wearing black clothing in a portrait was a clear sign of wealth. Likewise, the ruff around Beatrix’s neck.

Dutch portraits featured ruffs that might be up to 200 pleats. The length of fabric to create such pleats could be well over 20 meters. The laundress starched the fabric and set the pleats with a hot poking stick. During the course of the 17th century, ruffs were replaced by broad lace or linen collars similar to what Isaac is wearing.

Both the bride and groom wear lace cuffs which were made of thin linen that was pleated and then edged with either bobbin or needle lace.

Lucas de Clercq & Feyntje van Steenkiste

Thirteen years after painting Isaac & Beatrix, Hals painted pendant portraits of another couple: Lucas de Clercq and Feyntje van Steenkiste. Lucas was a successful Haarlem potash merchant who married the daughter of his supplier in 1629. Hals painted the couple nine years later. The couple had three children before Feyntje died in 1640.

The Mennonite couple wears black clothing to modestly signify their wealth without boasting of it too much. He wears a lace collar; she, a ruff. The sling on Lucas’s arm was a fashion accessory.

The Regentesses

Amsterdam was a wealthy city during the Dutch Golden Age, and with wealth came the responsibility of sharing with those who were less fortunate: those who were sick, orphaned, aged, or feeble. Among them, the lepers housed just outside the city.

The Lepers’ House was governed by four regents and three regentesses. Men took care of the general management of the charity, while women concerned themselves with supervising those who served within the hospital and purchasing supplies. The Rijksmuseum has two paintings of regentesses. Visitors do not spend much time looking at these portraits. Neither the artists nor the subjects hold particular interest. But, these women also have stories to tell.

In 1624, Werner van den Valckert painted this portrait of the Three Regentesses and the Housemother of the Amsterdam Lepers’ Asylum. The woman with the flat collar and head band is the housemother. All of the women wear black, but only the regentesses have lace at their wrists, ruff collars, and diadem caps.

In the background, the viewer can see the story of Lazarus, the beggar who begged for mercy from the rich man. In life, the rich man had more than he needed while Lazarus starved. In death, Lazarus went to paradise and the rich man to Hades — an apt reminder to the viewer of the importance of charity.

The women are shown with the symbols of their office: the Bible with the story of Lazarus marked, bags of money and a slate for keeping accounts.

Ferdinand Bol painted the Portrait of the Three Regentesses of the Leprozenhuis in 1668. We have names for these women. From left to right, the women are Clara Abba, Elisabeth van Duijnen, & Agatha Munter. Wearing black garments and fashionable lace collars and cuffs, they too are shown with the symbols of their office — coins, a pen and inkwell, and an account book. Van Duijinen was the treasurer and Munter the secretary. Munter holds out open hands, though whether she is giving or receiving is not clear. Van Duijinen is a widow, as shown by her hood.

The regentesses demonstrate that women in the Dutch Golden Age exercised a certain amount of autonomy through their participation in charitable activities. And clearly, they had access to funds to pay artists to preserve their likeness in charitable history. Moreover, their facial expressions indicate a certain satisfaction with their lot in life.

But, I wondered, where were the female artists? More on the next blog.

? ? ? ? ?

Sandra’s Books: Sea Tigers & Merchants. Ambition, Arrogance & Pride. Saxon Heroines. Two Coins. Rama’s Labyrinth.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Marriage Portrait of Isaac Massa & Beatrix van der Laen by Frans Hals; Photo of Eryngium Bourgati by Ramin Nakisa; Portrait of Lucas de Clercq by Hals; Portrait of Feyntje van Steenkiste by Hals; Three Regentesses and the Housemother of the Amsterdam Lepers’ Asylum by Werner van den Valckert; Portrait of the Three Regentesses of the Leprozenhuis by Ferdinand Bol. Sophie Ploeg. “Seventeenth Century Dutch Dress.” Sophie Ploeg. Feb. 13, 2018. Ploeg. “Dress in Seventeenth Century Portraiture. Sophie Ploeg. Dec. 31, 2022.

The post Women’s Portraits in the Rijksmuseum first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.

When I was in middle school, every student had to take a semester of music and a semester of art before they could take any other electives unless they kept to either music or art for their entire middle school career. I didn’t know if I would like music, but I knew I wouldn’t like art, because I could not draw worth a diddle, and my color choices didn’t bode well for water color exercises.

Not surprisingly, I chose two semesters of chorus, and planned to sing the rest of my middle school career . . . until for some reason I decided I wanted to take typing – now known as keyboarding. It was a wise choice since I’m on the keyboard everyday, but to get into typing class, I had to face art class. We had exciting projects. One was to hold your left hand in front of your face and without looking down at the paper, draw the hand. That went about as well as you might expect, and my grade wasn’t looking too good.

But, it was possible to earn extra credit by doing an oral report on an artist and his [It was his back then.] work. So, off I went to the library and found an illustrated book about Rembrandt. Not only did it have basic information on Rembrandt’s life and career. It had a two-page illustration of his famous painting: Night Watch. The picture was black and white, but I could still hold the book up and hide behind the it.

My recent visit to Amsterdam gave me the opportunity to visit the Rijksmuseum and view Rembrandt’s famous painting in person while observing current restoration efforts.

Commissioning Rembrandt’s Night Watch

In 1638, Amsterdam was a center of art, science, and commerce. The city was at the height of its Golden Age when, over objections from the seat of government at The Hague, Amsterdam invited the exiled Marie de Medici for an official visit. The city hoped to broker an understanding with France so that Marie could be reconciled with her son Louis XIII. This did not work out, but the visit was an overall success from Amsterdam’s perspective.

Marie’s visit from August 31 to September 5, 1638 was a six day celebration with accompanying pageantry. Although it rained the entire time, a full complement of Amsterdam’s militias, known as Kloveniers, escorted the exiled queen throughout the city. Marie took her meals at the Amsterdam Admiralty. However, her entourage convened on the first floor of the Klovenier’s Great Hall. Borrowed tapestries covered blank walls for the duration of Marie’s visit. Afterwards, the militias decided to cover the halls with large group portraits of the six city militias.

Traditionally, such group portraits gave each subject equal attention. This seemed fair, since each member of the company contributed to the cost of the portrait. This is the militia company of District VIII under the command of Captain Roelof Bicker by Bartholomeus van Der Holst. The images are posed, static, and do not detract from identifiable members of the group.

In 1639 Captain Frans Banning Cocq and seventeen members of his militia commissioned Rembrandt to paint their group portrait. Each member contributed towards Rembrandt’s fee with Captain Cocq and his lieutenant, Willem Van Ruytenburch, contributing the largest amounts. The painting’s projected dimensions were 12 feet by 14.5 feet, too large for the artist’s studio. Rembrandt probably completed the painting in a lean-to located in his garden.

Rembrandt’s Vision

Rembrandt did not paint a traditional group portrait. On the contrary, he used light and dark hues to create the picture of a militia in action.

The time of day is dawn. Captain Cocq gives Lieutenant Ruytenburch the order to move out with a gesture of his hand. Militia members get into formation; an ensign carries the company colors on the left. Men check their weapons. The drummer prepares to beat for action.

The most important figures—the figures with the most light—are Captain Cocq, Lieutenant Ruytenburch, and a young girl. Cocq’s clothing denotes his status. He has a lace collar, black attire made from fine fabric, and a sash and baton to denote his rank. Cocq’s lieutenant turns toward him to acknowledge the commander’s orders. His own attire is the same pigment of yellow artists used to paint lemons in still lives. His jacket features fine embroidery. Both men are the epitome of wealthy merchants.

A shadow by the drum outlines a dog. Over time, the top layers of the figure were lost due to abrasion of the paint leaving only the light sketch beneath the paint.

The girl is an enigma. Was she a real person or a symbolic mascot? Experts compare her face to that of Rembrandt’s wife Saskia who died in 1642 from tuberculosis. A dead chicken with large claws hangs from her belt. A pistol called a clover is beneath the chicken. The claws and clover were symbols of these “Kloveniers,” and generally depicted as a golden claw on a blue field.

In 1715 the city moved Rembrandt’s painting to a venue at the Town Hall that was smaller than its place in Great Hall. The painting’s size was trimmed on all four size to fit the space.

In the late 18th century, people began calling Rembrandt’s painting Night Watch. The painting was covered with a dark varnish, and no longer bore any resemblance to dawn. Today the official title of Rembrandt’s painting is Civic Guardsmen of District II under the Command of Captain Frans Bannick Cocq. It’s much easier to refer to Rembrandt’s painting as Night Watch.

Operation Night Watch

In July 2019, the Rijksmuseum embarked on a massive restoration project called Operation Night Watch. Researchers began mapping Rembrandt’s painting layer-by-layer and pigment-by-pigment, using high resolution digital photography, x-rays, fluorescence analysis, and spectroscopy. Rather than removing the painting from public viewing, the Rijksmuseum made the entire process a public display.

Among other discoveries, the process has revealed Rembrandt’s original sketches beneath the paint as he tried out different ideas, and the types and pigments of the artist’s paints.

Gallery of Honor

The Night Watch is housed in its own gallery at the end of the Gallery of Honor on the second level of the Rijksmuseum. It creates the impression that the entire history of Dutch painting in the Golden Age led to this one master piece.

Night Watch was one of the last portrait paintings of its kind in terms of scale, and by the late 18th century militias played an increasingly less prominent role in Dutch life.

I didn’t enjoy my middle school art class, but the extra credit report I did on Rembrandt introduced me to the world of art. I will always be grateful for that introduction.

? ? ? ? ?

Sandra’s Books: Sea Tigers & Merchants. Ambition, Arrogance & Pride. Saxon Heroines. Two Coins. Rama’s Labyrinth.

Illustrations & A Few Sources

Rembrandt Self-Portrait in a Flat Cap, 1642; Arrival of Maria de Medici in Amsterdam by Salomon Saver; District VIII under the command of Captain Roelof Bicker by Bartholomeus van Der Holst, 1643; Night Watch Restoration by Rembrandt by Vbena; Detail: Girl in Night Watch; Night Watch Restoration, Photo by Author. Richard Whiddington.”Revealing the Secret History of Rembrandt’s ‘Night Watch.'” Artnet. “Operation Night Watch.” Rijksmuseum.

The post Rembrandt, The Night Watch, & Me first appeared on Sandra Wagner-Wright.