Song Curio
Find your next musical obsession.
Curio Cabinet
- By Date
- By Type
November 30, 2024
-
9 minFREEWork Business CurioFree5 CQ
There are new details on the Department of Government Efficiency. It’s not a government agency but a kind of commission headed by tech billionaire Elon Musk ...
There are new details on the Department of Government Efficiency. It’s not a government agency but a kind of commission headed by tech billionaire Elon Musk ...
-
FREESoccer Sporty CurioFree1 CQ
How can a team that’s suffered its share of losses still be a winner? When it’s the San Marino national football team. This scrappy soccer team is making a surprising showing in the Nations League group, where they’re competing for a spot in the 2026 World Cup. As it stands, it’s unlikely that San Marino will make it to the World Cup, but the possibility is impressive considering their overall record. The team made its debut in 1986, and since then, they’ve played a total of 216 games. Of those, they have lost 202. Of the times they didn’t lose, they have played to a draw 11 times and have only won three games—all against Lichtenstein, including their latest 3-1 win on November 25. A small, landlocked nation located within Italy, San Marino only has a population of about 35,000. With such a limited pool to choose from, it’s a wonder that they’ve managed to field an entire team of players that can compete at the international level. Though victories are scarce for the team, each one is greatly appreciated. After their latest match against Lichtenstein, San Marino soccer federation president Marco Tura told the press, “I even cried among the boys, I hugged the captain and it was an incredible thing.” That’s a team that anyone could root for.
How can a team that’s suffered its share of losses still be a winner? When it’s the San Marino national football team. This scrappy soccer team is making a surprising showing in the Nations League group, where they’re competing for a spot in the 2026 World Cup. As it stands, it’s unlikely that San Marino will make it to the World Cup, but the possibility is impressive considering their overall record. The team made its debut in 1986, and since then, they’ve played a total of 216 games. Of those, they have lost 202. Of the times they didn’t lose, they have played to a draw 11 times and have only won three games—all against Lichtenstein, including their latest 3-1 win on November 25. A small, landlocked nation located within Italy, San Marino only has a population of about 35,000. With such a limited pool to choose from, it’s a wonder that they’ve managed to field an entire team of players that can compete at the international level. Though victories are scarce for the team, each one is greatly appreciated. After their latest match against Lichtenstein, San Marino soccer federation president Marco Tura told the press, “I even cried among the boys, I hugged the captain and it was an incredible thing.” That’s a team that anyone could root for.
November 29, 2024
-
FREEMind + Body Daily CurioFree1 CQ
As we sort through our Thanksgiving leftovers starting today, we’ll inevitably find ourselves eating lots of potatoes. Mashed with gravy or roasted in their skins, these hearty root vegetables are a staple of the holiday. One particularly fancy iteration of Thanksgiving potatoes is the scalloped variety. But where did this sumptuous side dish get such a seafood-esque name? And are scalloped potatoes really just the same thing as potatoes au gratin?
Scalloped potatoes is a dish of thinly sliced potatoes baked in heavy cream or milk. Garlic and herbs are sometimes added to the cream, as are chopped onions. Cheese is a common topping, but traditional recipes don’t call for any cheese at all. No one quite knows where scalloped potatoes got their name from. One theory is that it comes from a fancy, 18th century dish of oysters served in scallop shells. The story goes that, as a cost saving measure, potatoes eventually replaced the oysters. However, the name could also come from the 14th century English word “collops”, which roughly translates to “thick slice.”
However it got its name, there’s no doubt that this dish has a bit of an identity crisis. The term “scalloped potatoes” is often used interchangeably with “au gratin potatoes”, (also known as potatoes au gratin) but there are some differences between the two dishes. First, au gratin potatoes are French, while scalloped potatoes are thought to have originated in England. Both dishes feature potatoes that have been sliced and baked, but au gratin potatoes always include cheese and, critically, a thin crust of sprinkled breadcrumbs. In fact, “au gratin” means “grated” or “with a crust.” Because of the cheese and breadcrumbs, au gratin potatoes tend to have a much thicker, bubblier crust than scalloped potatoes. But hey, the lack of crust just makes it easier to spoon more scalloped potatoes onto our holiday plates.
[Image description: A close-up photo of raw potatoes.] Credit & copyright: Marco Antonio Victorino, PexelsAs we sort through our Thanksgiving leftovers starting today, we’ll inevitably find ourselves eating lots of potatoes. Mashed with gravy or roasted in their skins, these hearty root vegetables are a staple of the holiday. One particularly fancy iteration of Thanksgiving potatoes is the scalloped variety. But where did this sumptuous side dish get such a seafood-esque name? And are scalloped potatoes really just the same thing as potatoes au gratin?
Scalloped potatoes is a dish of thinly sliced potatoes baked in heavy cream or milk. Garlic and herbs are sometimes added to the cream, as are chopped onions. Cheese is a common topping, but traditional recipes don’t call for any cheese at all. No one quite knows where scalloped potatoes got their name from. One theory is that it comes from a fancy, 18th century dish of oysters served in scallop shells. The story goes that, as a cost saving measure, potatoes eventually replaced the oysters. However, the name could also come from the 14th century English word “collops”, which roughly translates to “thick slice.”
However it got its name, there’s no doubt that this dish has a bit of an identity crisis. The term “scalloped potatoes” is often used interchangeably with “au gratin potatoes”, (also known as potatoes au gratin) but there are some differences between the two dishes. First, au gratin potatoes are French, while scalloped potatoes are thought to have originated in England. Both dishes feature potatoes that have been sliced and baked, but au gratin potatoes always include cheese and, critically, a thin crust of sprinkled breadcrumbs. In fact, “au gratin” means “grated” or “with a crust.” Because of the cheese and breadcrumbs, au gratin potatoes tend to have a much thicker, bubblier crust than scalloped potatoes. But hey, the lack of crust just makes it easier to spoon more scalloped potatoes onto our holiday plates.
[Image description: A close-up photo of raw potatoes.] Credit & copyright: Marco Antonio Victorino, Pexels
November 28, 2024
-
FREEBiology Nerdy CurioFree1 CQ
Forming memories is kind of the brain’s thing. That’s where all the information about our past is stored…right? As it turns out, the brain might not be the only organ in the human body capable of forming memories, according to a paper published by New York University (NYU) researchers in Nature Communications. Memories in the brain are stored by neurons—specialized cells that are uniquely structured for that purpose. However, researchers at NYU have found that memory genes can be activated in nerve cells and organs to help them function more efficiently using something called the massed-spaced effect. It’s a phenomenon where people retain information better when they’re exposed to it in spaced intervals rather than in a single occurrence. When cells outside the brain are exposed to chemical signals, it’s similar to the process by which neurotransmitters interact with neurons. Researchers found that it activates the cells’ memory genes and, like neurons, the cells can then “remember” better when signals come in intervals rather than in single, large bursts. The memories these cells form aren’t quite like memories in neurons, though. They appear to be specifically related to improving their individual functions and can’t be consciously accessed. This study sheds more light on how neurons work, but it also gives enormous insight into how the rest of the body functions. One of the co-authors of the study, Nikolay Kukushkin, said in the university’s press release, “This discovery opens new doors for understanding how memory works and could lead to better ways to enhance learning and treat memory problems. At the same time, it suggests that in the future, we will need to treat our body more like the brain—for example, consider what our pancreas remembers about the pattern of our past meals to maintain healthy levels of blood glucose or consider what a cancer cell remembers about the pattern of chemotherapy.” A disease that remembers the last time you tried to kill it? Frankly, that’s something we’d rather forget.
[Image description: Models of a human brain and lightbulb against a pink background.] Credit & copyright: KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA, Pexels
Forming memories is kind of the brain’s thing. That’s where all the information about our past is stored…right? As it turns out, the brain might not be the only organ in the human body capable of forming memories, according to a paper published by New York University (NYU) researchers in Nature Communications. Memories in the brain are stored by neurons—specialized cells that are uniquely structured for that purpose. However, researchers at NYU have found that memory genes can be activated in nerve cells and organs to help them function more efficiently using something called the massed-spaced effect. It’s a phenomenon where people retain information better when they’re exposed to it in spaced intervals rather than in a single occurrence. When cells outside the brain are exposed to chemical signals, it’s similar to the process by which neurotransmitters interact with neurons. Researchers found that it activates the cells’ memory genes and, like neurons, the cells can then “remember” better when signals come in intervals rather than in single, large bursts. The memories these cells form aren’t quite like memories in neurons, though. They appear to be specifically related to improving their individual functions and can’t be consciously accessed. This study sheds more light on how neurons work, but it also gives enormous insight into how the rest of the body functions. One of the co-authors of the study, Nikolay Kukushkin, said in the university’s press release, “This discovery opens new doors for understanding how memory works and could lead to better ways to enhance learning and treat memory problems. At the same time, it suggests that in the future, we will need to treat our body more like the brain—for example, consider what our pancreas remembers about the pattern of our past meals to maintain healthy levels of blood glucose or consider what a cancer cell remembers about the pattern of chemotherapy.” A disease that remembers the last time you tried to kill it? Frankly, that’s something we’d rather forget.
[Image description: Models of a human brain and lightbulb against a pink background.] Credit & copyright: KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA, Pexels
-
FREEEngineering Daily Curio #2986Free1 CQ
Ah rats, there’s too many drivers on the road this time of year…including actual rats. When a group of neuroscientists taught rats to drive tiny, specially-made cars, they weren’t surprised by their success. They were surprised, however, by how much the rats seemed to enjoy it. One of the researchers, Kelly Lambert at the University of Richmond wrote in Live Science, “Rats typically prefer dirt, sticks, and rocks over plastic objects.” Yet when Lambert and her colleagues started training rats to drive, the rambunctious rodents took to it quickly—and with gusto. Maybe it was just the breakfast cereal researchers used as rewards, but the rats didn’t seem to mind the strange little contraptions they were placed into. The “cars” they drove, which consisted of a clear box on wheels steered by wires the rats could pull on, were fairly rudimentary and definitely not street-legal (rat rods, one might call them), but they were still unnatural contraptions that the rats were unfamiliar with. It would have been reasonable to assume that the rats would fear the cars. Yet, the rodents seemed to love them. As Lambert further elucidated, humans didn’t evolve to drive cars either. What allows us to enjoy driving is the human brain’s flexibility, a trait also shared by rats. It even seems that, just as humans sometimes go driving to regain a sense of control when stressed, so can rats. After driving, the rats were found to have lower levels of corticosterone, the rat equivalent of humans’ cortisol, the “stress hormone.” At the same time, their levels of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) went down. DHEA is a hormone that protects against the effects of corticosterone. Of course, the researchers didn’t do all of this just for kicks, as adorable as the concept of driving rats may be. This was part of a larger study exploring the effects of chronic stress in humans, including its negative health consequences, like type 2 diabetes. These scientists managed to perform valuable research while giving the world rats that can drive. Rats off to them!
Ah rats, there’s too many drivers on the road this time of year…including actual rats. When a group of neuroscientists taught rats to drive tiny, specially-made cars, they weren’t surprised by their success. They were surprised, however, by how much the rats seemed to enjoy it. One of the researchers, Kelly Lambert at the University of Richmond wrote in Live Science, “Rats typically prefer dirt, sticks, and rocks over plastic objects.” Yet when Lambert and her colleagues started training rats to drive, the rambunctious rodents took to it quickly—and with gusto. Maybe it was just the breakfast cereal researchers used as rewards, but the rats didn’t seem to mind the strange little contraptions they were placed into. The “cars” they drove, which consisted of a clear box on wheels steered by wires the rats could pull on, were fairly rudimentary and definitely not street-legal (rat rods, one might call them), but they were still unnatural contraptions that the rats were unfamiliar with. It would have been reasonable to assume that the rats would fear the cars. Yet, the rodents seemed to love them. As Lambert further elucidated, humans didn’t evolve to drive cars either. What allows us to enjoy driving is the human brain’s flexibility, a trait also shared by rats. It even seems that, just as humans sometimes go driving to regain a sense of control when stressed, so can rats. After driving, the rats were found to have lower levels of corticosterone, the rat equivalent of humans’ cortisol, the “stress hormone.” At the same time, their levels of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) went down. DHEA is a hormone that protects against the effects of corticosterone. Of course, the researchers didn’t do all of this just for kicks, as adorable as the concept of driving rats may be. This was part of a larger study exploring the effects of chronic stress in humans, including its negative health consequences, like type 2 diabetes. These scientists managed to perform valuable research while giving the world rats that can drive. Rats off to them!
November 27, 2024
-
FREEBiology Nerdy CurioFree1 CQ
Is that a nose or a vacuum? For giant anteaters, it’s both. These strange-looking animals have long, luxurious fur, a prominent stripe, and intimidating claws. But their most stand-out feature is their long muzzle and the tongue inside, which can extend over two feet. Giant anteaters use this impressive appendage to reach deep inside anthills and termite mounds and effortlessly lap up the insects within. Since giant anteaters are currently considered a vulnerable (but not yet endangered) species, the recent birth of a giant anteater pup at the Cotswold Wildlife Park in West Oxfordshire, England, has made international headlines and piqued worldwide interest in this unusual species.
There are only four species of anteaters in the world, and, as their name implies, giant anteaters are by far the biggest. They can reach lengths between six and eight feet, and weigh up to 140 pounds. For a long time, scientists assumed that giant anteaters were related to pangolins and aardvarks because they look so much alike, with long noses and curved claws. Thanks to DNA analysis, we now know that these similarities were due to convergent evolution (when two species evolve similar traits because they fill similar niches) and giant anteaters are actually more closely related to sloths and armadillos.
Since they’re native to Central and South America, giant anteaters are always surrounded by animals that are just as large and powerful as themselves. Jaguars pose a particular threat, especially to anteater pups. Giant anteaters have no teeth to defend themselves with, but their curved claws can be used both for digging up insects and for self defense. On the rare occasion that a giant anteater gets into an altercation, it may rear onto its hind legs, using its tail for balance, and slash at an opponent with its claws. Don’t let their friendly demeanor, toothless mouths, and funny-looking faces fool you—these insect-eaters pack a wallop.
[Image description: An anteater standing with its nose in the air at San Francisco Zoo.] Credit & copyright: Daderot, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain DedicationIs that a nose or a vacuum? For giant anteaters, it’s both. These strange-looking animals have long, luxurious fur, a prominent stripe, and intimidating claws. But their most stand-out feature is their long muzzle and the tongue inside, which can extend over two feet. Giant anteaters use this impressive appendage to reach deep inside anthills and termite mounds and effortlessly lap up the insects within. Since giant anteaters are currently considered a vulnerable (but not yet endangered) species, the recent birth of a giant anteater pup at the Cotswold Wildlife Park in West Oxfordshire, England, has made international headlines and piqued worldwide interest in this unusual species.
There are only four species of anteaters in the world, and, as their name implies, giant anteaters are by far the biggest. They can reach lengths between six and eight feet, and weigh up to 140 pounds. For a long time, scientists assumed that giant anteaters were related to pangolins and aardvarks because they look so much alike, with long noses and curved claws. Thanks to DNA analysis, we now know that these similarities were due to convergent evolution (when two species evolve similar traits because they fill similar niches) and giant anteaters are actually more closely related to sloths and armadillos.
Since they’re native to Central and South America, giant anteaters are always surrounded by animals that are just as large and powerful as themselves. Jaguars pose a particular threat, especially to anteater pups. Giant anteaters have no teeth to defend themselves with, but their curved claws can be used both for digging up insects and for self defense. On the rare occasion that a giant anteater gets into an altercation, it may rear onto its hind legs, using its tail for balance, and slash at an opponent with its claws. Don’t let their friendly demeanor, toothless mouths, and funny-looking faces fool you—these insect-eaters pack a wallop.
[Image description: An anteater standing with its nose in the air at San Francisco Zoo.] Credit & copyright: Daderot, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication -
FREEDaily Curio #2985Free1 CQ
Treason is a pretty incendiary crime…especially when actual fire is involved. This month in 1864, a group of eight men calling themselves the Confederate Army of Manhattan attempted to set fire to New York City using improvised firebombs. Their plot, however, didn’t quite go as planned. By the fall of 1864, the American Civil War was drawing to a close. It was clear that the Union was likely to emerge victorious, and by September, General William Tecumseh Sherman had trampled through much of the South, razing the city of Atlanta in the process. Some Confederates weren’t ready to call it quits just yet. Robert Cobb Kennedy and other like-minded Confederates hiding out in Canada began conspiring to deliver a devastating blow to the Union. First, they tried to affect that year’s elections by taking federal buildings in New York by force. Once in control of the buildings, the goal was to raise support for the South among New Yorkers, many of whom had economic interests in the cotton industry. That plan was thwarted when President Lincoln sent troops to guard the buildings. Following this failure, Kennedy and his cohorts pivoted to a different strategy: bring the Union to its knees by burning New York.
Their plan was relatively simple: each man would carry ten firebombs and would go from hotel to hotel setting them alight in the hopes that the fire would spread. Yet even this straightforward plan fizzled out. On November 25, the appointed date, two of the men didn’t show up and the remaining six failed to cause much more than a nuisance. The unsuccessful avengers of the South fled back to Canada to wait out the war, but Kennedy tried to sneak back in through Michigan, where he was caught and arrested. At a military trial, the former Confederate captain was found guilty for his part in the plot and sentenced to hang. Kennedy tried to have his sentence commuted to life in prison by appealing to Lincoln, but to no avail. On March 25, 1865, Kennedy earned the ignominious honor of being the last man to be executed during the Civil War, just two weeks before it ended. He had a burning passion, but with too short a fuse.
[Image description: A painting of a Civil War battle. A brown horse rears as its rider is shot. Union Soldiers holding the American flag stand in the right foreground. The Confederate army can be seen in the distance.] Credit & copyright: National Gallery of Art,
Gift of Edgar William and Bernice Chrysler Garbisch, Public Domain Creative Commons Zero (CC0).Treason is a pretty incendiary crime…especially when actual fire is involved. This month in 1864, a group of eight men calling themselves the Confederate Army of Manhattan attempted to set fire to New York City using improvised firebombs. Their plot, however, didn’t quite go as planned. By the fall of 1864, the American Civil War was drawing to a close. It was clear that the Union was likely to emerge victorious, and by September, General William Tecumseh Sherman had trampled through much of the South, razing the city of Atlanta in the process. Some Confederates weren’t ready to call it quits just yet. Robert Cobb Kennedy and other like-minded Confederates hiding out in Canada began conspiring to deliver a devastating blow to the Union. First, they tried to affect that year’s elections by taking federal buildings in New York by force. Once in control of the buildings, the goal was to raise support for the South among New Yorkers, many of whom had economic interests in the cotton industry. That plan was thwarted when President Lincoln sent troops to guard the buildings. Following this failure, Kennedy and his cohorts pivoted to a different strategy: bring the Union to its knees by burning New York.
Their plan was relatively simple: each man would carry ten firebombs and would go from hotel to hotel setting them alight in the hopes that the fire would spread. Yet even this straightforward plan fizzled out. On November 25, the appointed date, two of the men didn’t show up and the remaining six failed to cause much more than a nuisance. The unsuccessful avengers of the South fled back to Canada to wait out the war, but Kennedy tried to sneak back in through Michigan, where he was caught and arrested. At a military trial, the former Confederate captain was found guilty for his part in the plot and sentenced to hang. Kennedy tried to have his sentence commuted to life in prison by appealing to Lincoln, but to no avail. On March 25, 1865, Kennedy earned the ignominious honor of being the last man to be executed during the Civil War, just two weeks before it ended. He had a burning passion, but with too short a fuse.
[Image description: A painting of a Civil War battle. A brown horse rears as its rider is shot. Union Soldiers holding the American flag stand in the right foreground. The Confederate army can be seen in the distance.] Credit & copyright: National Gallery of Art,
Gift of Edgar William and Bernice Chrysler Garbisch, Public Domain Creative Commons Zero (CC0).
November 26, 2024
-
FREELiterature Daily Curio #2984Free1 CQ
Are witches bad, good, or can they be either? Until L. Frank Baum published his Oz series—starting with The Wonderful Wizard of Oz in 1900—witches were evil by default. The concept of a “good” witch, like Glinda, was actually inspired by a real woman: Baum’s mother-in-law, Matilda Joslyn Gage, a suffragist and abolitionist. With Wicked now in theaters, it might be a good time to learn about the inspiration behind the iconic witches featured in the movie.
For centuries, fictional witches were portrayed as murderous women or agents of the devil. Even in Baum’s time, they were associated with occult or devious deeds and were often the villains in children’s stories. Of course, real life wasn’t any kinder to so-called witches. Throughout history, many people (mostly women) lost their lives after being accused of witchcraft. The history of witch hunts was a topic of great interest to Matilda Joslyn Gage. As a women’s rights activist, Gage worked with the likes of Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The three were co-founders of the National Woman Suffrage Association and wrote History of Woman Suffrage together, but they didn’t always see eye-to-eye. While Anthony and Stanton aligned themselves with the temperance movement and its religious cohorts, Gage was adamantly against religion and its effects on government and women’s rights. Gage saw religion as one of the main causes of historical witch hunts and of women’s subjugation.
While there are no written records of Gage and Baum’s conversations on the matter, it’s clear that Baum’s inclusion of a “Good Witch” in the Oz series was a deliberate breakaway from the evil witch archetype. It’s also been suggested that the character of Glinda, a powerful, benevolent figure who encourages Dorothy on her journey, is based on Gage herself. If that’s true, it’s probably the only time someone compared their mother-in-law to a witch as a compliment!
[Image description: A black-and-white engraving of feminist activist Matilda Joslyn Gage wearing a black dress.] Credit & copyright: Harper, Ida Husted, History of Woman Suffrage (1881). Wikimedia Commons. This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer.Are witches bad, good, or can they be either? Until L. Frank Baum published his Oz series—starting with The Wonderful Wizard of Oz in 1900—witches were evil by default. The concept of a “good” witch, like Glinda, was actually inspired by a real woman: Baum’s mother-in-law, Matilda Joslyn Gage, a suffragist and abolitionist. With Wicked now in theaters, it might be a good time to learn about the inspiration behind the iconic witches featured in the movie.
For centuries, fictional witches were portrayed as murderous women or agents of the devil. Even in Baum’s time, they were associated with occult or devious deeds and were often the villains in children’s stories. Of course, real life wasn’t any kinder to so-called witches. Throughout history, many people (mostly women) lost their lives after being accused of witchcraft. The history of witch hunts was a topic of great interest to Matilda Joslyn Gage. As a women’s rights activist, Gage worked with the likes of Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The three were co-founders of the National Woman Suffrage Association and wrote History of Woman Suffrage together, but they didn’t always see eye-to-eye. While Anthony and Stanton aligned themselves with the temperance movement and its religious cohorts, Gage was adamantly against religion and its effects on government and women’s rights. Gage saw religion as one of the main causes of historical witch hunts and of women’s subjugation.
While there are no written records of Gage and Baum’s conversations on the matter, it’s clear that Baum’s inclusion of a “Good Witch” in the Oz series was a deliberate breakaway from the evil witch archetype. It’s also been suggested that the character of Glinda, a powerful, benevolent figure who encourages Dorothy on her journey, is based on Gage herself. If that’s true, it’s probably the only time someone compared their mother-in-law to a witch as a compliment!
[Image description: A black-and-white engraving of feminist activist Matilda Joslyn Gage wearing a black dress.] Credit & copyright: Harper, Ida Husted, History of Woman Suffrage (1881). Wikimedia Commons. This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer.
November 25, 2024
-
FREEArt Appreciation Art CurioFree1 CQ
This turkey doesn’t seem ready for Thanksgiving! Dutch artist Melchior de Hondecoeter, who specialized in painting poultry, created this lively image some time around 1680. A Rooster and Turkey Fighting, depicts a battle between a turkey with its wings spread out on the left, and a flapping rooster bearing down on the turkey. Around them are other livestock and exotic birds. Hondecoeter came from a line of painters; both his father and grandfather specialized in depicting animals. Hondecoeter almost exclusively painted birds, and was known for his lifelike details and dynamic poses. Whether roosters, hens, peacocks, or waterfowl, Hondecoeter faithfully captured the posture and plumage of each bird. As an artist, Hondecoeter was in high demand, and sometimes repeated the same themes. In fact, this painting isn’t his only one featuring a rooster and turkey fighting. Understandable, as it’s quite a scene.
A Rooster and Turkey Fighting, Melchior de Hondecoeter
(Dutch, 1636–1695), c. 1680, Oil on canvas, 54 x 65.5 in. (137.2 x 166.4 cm.), The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland, Ohio
[Image credit & copyright: The Cleveland Museum of Art, John L. Severance Fund 1986.59, Public Domain, Creative Commons Zero (CC0) designation.This turkey doesn’t seem ready for Thanksgiving! Dutch artist Melchior de Hondecoeter, who specialized in painting poultry, created this lively image some time around 1680. A Rooster and Turkey Fighting, depicts a battle between a turkey with its wings spread out on the left, and a flapping rooster bearing down on the turkey. Around them are other livestock and exotic birds. Hondecoeter came from a line of painters; both his father and grandfather specialized in depicting animals. Hondecoeter almost exclusively painted birds, and was known for his lifelike details and dynamic poses. Whether roosters, hens, peacocks, or waterfowl, Hondecoeter faithfully captured the posture and plumage of each bird. As an artist, Hondecoeter was in high demand, and sometimes repeated the same themes. In fact, this painting isn’t his only one featuring a rooster and turkey fighting. Understandable, as it’s quite a scene.
A Rooster and Turkey Fighting, Melchior de Hondecoeter
(Dutch, 1636–1695), c. 1680, Oil on canvas, 54 x 65.5 in. (137.2 x 166.4 cm.), The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland, Ohio
[Image credit & copyright: The Cleveland Museum of Art, John L. Severance Fund 1986.59, Public Domain, Creative Commons Zero (CC0) designation. -
FREEWorld History Daily Curio #2983Free1 CQ
History can be stranger than fiction. With Gladiator II in theaters now, it’s only natural to wonder about the real Colosseum where they fought. While the movie takes some artistic liberties, some of what it portrays isn’t far from reality. Before the construction of the Colosseum, gladiatorial battles were fought in the forum, the same public space where processions, speeches, and other events were held. Such open displays of violence were not only common, but widely celebrated in Rome. By modern standards, it would be a bit like a sanctioned knife fight right in the middle of Times Square. Hollywood didn’t invent the idea of over-the-top displays, like flooding the Colosseum to hold naval battles. Such events really did take place; they were called naumachiae, and enslaved fighters were forced to battle to the death on actual ships. A naumachia was held during the Colosseum’s infamous inaugural games in 80 C.E., to celebrate the arena’s opening. The games went on for 100 days straight, serving as a display of Roman military might in addition to entertainment. While most gladiators were enslaved and forced to fight, they weren’t exactly dying in droves. Unlike other fighters in the arena, gladiators were specially trained to fight using specific types of equipment, and they were more about showmanship than killing. Only about five percent of gladiators actually died in the arena, and fights usually ended in a draw. Gladiators were expensive to train, house, and feed, so losing one was always a financial setback for the Colosseum’s managers. Some gladiators even managed to achieve celebrity status, earning fans and endorsement deals much like modern day athletes. Some of them were famous for their looks, earning the adoration of female fans. Even millennia ago, some ladies couldn’t help but be drawn to bad boys.
[Image description: A photo of the colosseum, a large, partially intact amphitheater in Rome.] Credit & copyright: Urse Ovidiu, Wikimedia Commons. The copyright holder of this work, releases this work into the public domain. This applies worldwide.History can be stranger than fiction. With Gladiator II in theaters now, it’s only natural to wonder about the real Colosseum where they fought. While the movie takes some artistic liberties, some of what it portrays isn’t far from reality. Before the construction of the Colosseum, gladiatorial battles were fought in the forum, the same public space where processions, speeches, and other events were held. Such open displays of violence were not only common, but widely celebrated in Rome. By modern standards, it would be a bit like a sanctioned knife fight right in the middle of Times Square. Hollywood didn’t invent the idea of over-the-top displays, like flooding the Colosseum to hold naval battles. Such events really did take place; they were called naumachiae, and enslaved fighters were forced to battle to the death on actual ships. A naumachia was held during the Colosseum’s infamous inaugural games in 80 C.E., to celebrate the arena’s opening. The games went on for 100 days straight, serving as a display of Roman military might in addition to entertainment. While most gladiators were enslaved and forced to fight, they weren’t exactly dying in droves. Unlike other fighters in the arena, gladiators were specially trained to fight using specific types of equipment, and they were more about showmanship than killing. Only about five percent of gladiators actually died in the arena, and fights usually ended in a draw. Gladiators were expensive to train, house, and feed, so losing one was always a financial setback for the Colosseum’s managers. Some gladiators even managed to achieve celebrity status, earning fans and endorsement deals much like modern day athletes. Some of them were famous for their looks, earning the adoration of female fans. Even millennia ago, some ladies couldn’t help but be drawn to bad boys.
[Image description: A photo of the colosseum, a large, partially intact amphitheater in Rome.] Credit & copyright: Urse Ovidiu, Wikimedia Commons. The copyright holder of this work, releases this work into the public domain. This applies worldwide. -
9 minFREEWork Business CurioFree5 CQ
Nvidia, the company that produces chips used in AI, will report its earnings Wednesday after markets close. Susan Schmidt, portfolio manager at Exchange Capi...
Nvidia, the company that produces chips used in AI, will report its earnings Wednesday after markets close. Susan Schmidt, portfolio manager at Exchange Capi...
November 24, 2024
-
8 minFREEWork Business CurioFree5 CQ
Nvidia is the most valuable company on the S&P 500 index, and Wednesday’s earnings report would be the envy of most companies. The chipmaker saw its sales do...
Nvidia is the most valuable company on the S&P 500 index, and Wednesday’s earnings report would be the envy of most companies. The chipmaker saw its sales do...
-
FREELiterature PP&T CurioFree1 CQ
If you’re only going to write one book, make it count. That’s exactly what 19th century British author Anna Sewell did with her one and only novel, Black Beauty. Published on this day in 1877, the book was a critical and commercial success. Written from the perspective of a horse, the story follows the titular character as he experiences increasing hardship under different owners. The book features vivid descriptions of inhumane treatment of horses, which was sadly common at the time of its publication. However, the novel actually helped bring an end to at least one cruel practice in addition to changing children’s literature forever.
Born on March 30, 1820 in Norfolk, England, Anna Sewell’s early life was difficult. Growing up in poverty, her family moved frequently, and the Sewell children (Anna and her brother) sometimes stayed with relatives. When she was 12 (or possibly 14), Anna broke both of her ankles after slipping and falling. Her medical treatment was inadequate, leaving her with lifelong mobility issues. Anna’s mother was a prolific author of religious children’s books, as well as books on social issues like abolition and temperance. In her adolescence, Sewell began helping her mother edit her manuscripts. However, it wasn’t until her fifties that Anna began work on a book of her own. The story was inspired by the very animals that her injury forced her to rely upon: horses. Unable to walk without pain and with her condition worsening over her lifetime, she was more dependent on horses than most people. Perhaps owing to her own injury and chronic pain, she developed a deep empathy for the animals. By the time Sewell published her book, she was 57 and in failing health. Just five months after Black Beauty was released, Sewell passed away from what was likely tuberculosis.
Sewell’s novel follows Black Beauty—a highbred male horse—throughout his life from his perspective. As a foal, he lives on a farm owned by kind masters who treat him well. He lives with his mother, Duchess, and half-brother, Rob Roy. After he is trained to be ridden and pull carts, Black Beauty is sold to another master, who also treats him well. During his time with his second masters, Black Beauty makes friends with his master’s other horses. However, his circumstances change for the worse when his owner’s family moves out of England and he is sold yet again. Black Beauty is separated from his friends, and his new owner is not as kind to him. One day, the new owner rides him while drunk, injuring him in the process. The injury is accompanied by a disfiguring scar which renders him unfashionable to ride, and he is sold once again, this time as a work horse in industrialized London. In the city, Black Beauty experiences increasing hardship as he is forced to perform grueling labor. Eventually, he is purchased by a kindly cabdriver, but is sold again after three years. During that time, he encounters one of his old friends, whose health and body have been ruined by years of hard labor and neglect. Later, Black Beauty himself collapses while attempting to pull a crowded cab. He is then purchased by a farmer who restores him to health and later sells him to a couple of old ladies who treat him well. After a long and difficult life, Black Beauty is able to live in quiet and peace once more.
Sewell’s novel was not only a hit, it contributed greatly to the banning of bearing-reins, a piece of horse harness that forced the animal’s neck back to create a more upright posture. The use of bearing-reins (also called checkreins or overchecks) was common before the book was published, and often caused debilitating injuries to horses. Black Beauty was heavily promoted by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for its sympathetic portrayal of horses and their combined efforts helped end the use of bearing-reins in England. In the literary world, Black Beauty ushered in a new type of novel, in which animals could literally tell their stories. Children’s classics like Charlotte's Web might not exist if not for Black Beauty. Young readers (and horses) would do well to thank Anna Sewell!
[Image description: The cover of the 1877 first edition of Black Beauty. The cover is green with gold flowers and the black head and neck of a horse.] Credit & copyright: London: Jarrold and Sons, Wikimedia Commons. This image (or other media file) is in the public domain because its copyright has expired. This applies to the European Union and those countries with a copyright term of 70 years after the work was made available to the public.If you’re only going to write one book, make it count. That’s exactly what 19th century British author Anna Sewell did with her one and only novel, Black Beauty. Published on this day in 1877, the book was a critical and commercial success. Written from the perspective of a horse, the story follows the titular character as he experiences increasing hardship under different owners. The book features vivid descriptions of inhumane treatment of horses, which was sadly common at the time of its publication. However, the novel actually helped bring an end to at least one cruel practice in addition to changing children’s literature forever.
Born on March 30, 1820 in Norfolk, England, Anna Sewell’s early life was difficult. Growing up in poverty, her family moved frequently, and the Sewell children (Anna and her brother) sometimes stayed with relatives. When she was 12 (or possibly 14), Anna broke both of her ankles after slipping and falling. Her medical treatment was inadequate, leaving her with lifelong mobility issues. Anna’s mother was a prolific author of religious children’s books, as well as books on social issues like abolition and temperance. In her adolescence, Sewell began helping her mother edit her manuscripts. However, it wasn’t until her fifties that Anna began work on a book of her own. The story was inspired by the very animals that her injury forced her to rely upon: horses. Unable to walk without pain and with her condition worsening over her lifetime, she was more dependent on horses than most people. Perhaps owing to her own injury and chronic pain, she developed a deep empathy for the animals. By the time Sewell published her book, she was 57 and in failing health. Just five months after Black Beauty was released, Sewell passed away from what was likely tuberculosis.
Sewell’s novel follows Black Beauty—a highbred male horse—throughout his life from his perspective. As a foal, he lives on a farm owned by kind masters who treat him well. He lives with his mother, Duchess, and half-brother, Rob Roy. After he is trained to be ridden and pull carts, Black Beauty is sold to another master, who also treats him well. During his time with his second masters, Black Beauty makes friends with his master’s other horses. However, his circumstances change for the worse when his owner’s family moves out of England and he is sold yet again. Black Beauty is separated from his friends, and his new owner is not as kind to him. One day, the new owner rides him while drunk, injuring him in the process. The injury is accompanied by a disfiguring scar which renders him unfashionable to ride, and he is sold once again, this time as a work horse in industrialized London. In the city, Black Beauty experiences increasing hardship as he is forced to perform grueling labor. Eventually, he is purchased by a kindly cabdriver, but is sold again after three years. During that time, he encounters one of his old friends, whose health and body have been ruined by years of hard labor and neglect. Later, Black Beauty himself collapses while attempting to pull a crowded cab. He is then purchased by a farmer who restores him to health and later sells him to a couple of old ladies who treat him well. After a long and difficult life, Black Beauty is able to live in quiet and peace once more.
Sewell’s novel was not only a hit, it contributed greatly to the banning of bearing-reins, a piece of horse harness that forced the animal’s neck back to create a more upright posture. The use of bearing-reins (also called checkreins or overchecks) was common before the book was published, and often caused debilitating injuries to horses. Black Beauty was heavily promoted by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for its sympathetic portrayal of horses and their combined efforts helped end the use of bearing-reins in England. In the literary world, Black Beauty ushered in a new type of novel, in which animals could literally tell their stories. Children’s classics like Charlotte's Web might not exist if not for Black Beauty. Young readers (and horses) would do well to thank Anna Sewell!
[Image description: The cover of the 1877 first edition of Black Beauty. The cover is green with gold flowers and the black head and neck of a horse.] Credit & copyright: London: Jarrold and Sons, Wikimedia Commons. This image (or other media file) is in the public domain because its copyright has expired. This applies to the European Union and those countries with a copyright term of 70 years after the work was made available to the public.
