Despite being overshadowed by the American Revolution, the War of 1812 was paramount in preserving the newly won independence of the young republic. Caused by years of tensions over territorial disputes, the impressment of American sailors into the Royal Navy, and the British blockade of American trade with France during the Napoleonic Wars, the War of 1812 served as the first fully-fledged conflict for the United States’ newly created military. Without the help of field, naval, and coastal artillery, the war could have been America’s last.   After the Revolutionary War Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans, Harry T. Peters, 1890. Source: Smithsonian Institution   During the War of 1812, artillerymen employed cannon in a similar fashion to their predecessors in the American Revolutionary War. Unlike the fight for independence, however, the United States was better prepared to counter the British second time round. With a regular army, established training procedures, and living artillery veterans with wartime experience, America was in a better position compared to their struggle for independence, but traditional roadblocks remained.   Although modern red-legs deploy artillery as an indirect weapon system, gun crews in the nineteenth century did not have the luxury of firing at what they could not directly see. As such, artillery during the War of 1812 was exclusively a direct fire asset despite lingering smoke that limited spotters’ fields of observation. Heavier artillery pieces could deliver projectiles over a distance of 1,000 yards towards adversary formations, but their effective range was significantly lower. Rifled gun barrels were not introduced in American conflicts until the Civil War, meaning that artillerymen facing the British fired smoothbore cannons which were notoriously inaccurate due to unpredictable trajectories of cannonballs as they were released from their barrels.   Due to these limitations, American field artillery commanders had to choose their emplacement positions carefully. Ideally, gun crews led their horse-drawn cannons to high terrain where enemy infantry lines could be observed for the duration of the battle, or where overlapping fields of fire from multiple batteries could prevent the enemy’s advance.   Technological Innovations British Light 6-Pounder Gun. Source: The War of 1812 Magazine   While artillery tactics in the War of 1812 resembled those of the American Revolutionary War, artillery technology had evolved during the intervening period, during which the entire European continent was engulfed in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars.   In a key innovation, British surgeon Henry Shrapnel introduced metal debris as an additional blast effect that increased the radius of projectile reach compared to traditional black powder explosives. These new capabilities paired well with the wide array of artillery pieces available to American gunners including the common 6-pounder gun, heavier iron cannons, and Canadian 24-pounders originally designed as an experimental weapon for the British Army. Over time, further technological innovations would bring different types of projectiles, fuses, and propellants to achieve different tactical outcomes on the battlefield.   The second major innovation during the period was the increasing use of rockets on the battlefield, pioneered by the British officer William Congreve. Fired via tripod-supported metal tubes, rockets offered artillerymen a lighter, more flexible, and quicker option compared to burdensome cannon weaponry. Despite these benefits, early rockets were notoriously inaccurate and were just as capable of hitting friendly targets as well as enemy ones. However, the psychological impact of rockets was undeniable, and over time they would be a key component in the toolkit of the US artillery in addition to guns and howitzers.   Impact in Battle General William Henry Harrison, Rembrandt Peale, date unknown. Source: Smithsonian Institution   The War of 1812 witnessed battles on land and sea spanning from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. During nearly all the actions in the war, artillery performed supporting roles to infantry assaults rather than carrying out standalone engagements. During the Battle of Baltimore, for example, the British relentlessly pounded Fort McHenry’s defenses with naval bombardment. Captain Frederick Evans of the United States Corps of Artillery led American counterfire against the British ships with over 100 cannons, including heavy 24-pound pieces, and 10,000 soldiers. On the northwestern front, General William Henry Harrison was supported by artillery as he led American troops to victory in battles across Indiana and Ohio, including the war-altering death of Tecumseh at the Battle of the Thames in October 1813.   Artillery was also used to great effect as a defensive weapon during the 1814 Battle of Plattsburgh to repel the British from invading New York and force the enemy’s retreat into Canada. Gun crews proved invaluable in keeping nearby lakes under American control, restricting British supply lines. While a significant strategic victory, the clash highlighted the value of artillery even in small sections. At Plattsburgh, General Alexander Macomb’s gun crews were armed with only six artillery pieces of various sizes. Just as a seemingly inconsequential number of cannons established dominance on land, admirals had similar experiences at sea.    Naval Artillery Perry’s victory on Lake Erie, Harry T. Peters, date unknown. Source: Smithsonian Institution   Not all American artillery utilized during the conflict was fired from land or at targets on firm ground. In fact, the War of 1812 saw major artillery duels at sea. Both coastal artillery and ship-based cannons enhanced the United States’ capabilities compared to the American Revolution. Over the course of the war, ironclad naval vessels became more popular due to the protection they enjoyed from enemy artillery. With an effective coastal artillery organization, as exemplified by the Battle of Baltimore, cannon fire protected American fortifications and naval assets at sea.   Offensively, Commodore Oliver Perry’s famous 1813 struggle against the British at Lake Erie enabled the United States to recapture Detroit. Armed with cast-iron carronades, Perry unleashed broadside volleys to destroy enemy ships at short-range. Despite immense damage to his flagship, Perry rowed a small rescue craft towards the USS Niagara where he assumed command and aggressively charged towards the British. Through surprise and disciplined gun crews, the United States was winning the war at sea. Over a year later, artillery bombardments dominating battlefields on land and water definitively secured the war’s end for the United States.   End of the War Defeat of the British Army, Harlow Thompson, 1815. Source: Smithsonian Institution   Field artillery enabled a commanding American victory in the final battle of the War of 1812, the Battle of New Orleans in January 1815. Although the United States and England signed the Treaty of Ghent in the previous month, the news had not yet reached the southern United States. Unaware of the agreement, General Andrew Jackson deployed his artillery parallel to the Rodriguez Canal, known as “Line Jackson,” to deliver a decisive blow to the British. Coupling cannon assets strategically alongside key terrain allowed the United States to achieve undeniable victory against the British, dispelling their decades-long rival for good.   On water, American vessels repelled British assaults near New Orleans for weeks leading up to the battle. A small flotilla defended against enemy approaches via Lake Borgne. The USS Carolina similarly played an essential role in General Jackson’s initial assault on the British encampment at Villere Plantation, further signaling the future president’s nighttime assault through timed bombardment. While the USS Carolina was ultimately destroyed, its guns paved the way for the final British defeat.   The Rockets’ Red Glare A view of the bombardment of Fort McHenry, 1814. Source: Smithsonian Institution   The effects of artillery during the War of 1812 are undeniable, and the weapon’s presence is forever memorialized in the national anthem of the United States. Surviving a 25-hour bombardment of Fort McHenry by British ships during the Battle of Baltimore, the young lawyer Francis Scott Key reflected on his experiences. Despite an initial hesitation to support the conflict due to his belief that war would cripple the young nation, Key served as the quartermaster of the Georgetown Light Field Artillery. As with any artillery unit, coordinating logistics and supplies for this unit was paramount in determining the readiness of the war’s most destructive asset.   As the British continued their naval bombardment, American gunners returned fire from the coastal artillery pieces. With the streaming trails of the Congreve rockets illuminating the night sky, Key could see the Stars and Stripes flying defiantly during the attack. Key recorded his experiences in a poem that reflected upon the effect of the “rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air.” Set to the tune of “To Anacreon in Heaven,” a popular English drinking song, “The Star-Spangled Banner” gradually gained popularity as an unofficial national anthem during the Mexican-American War and the Civil War. In 1931, President Herbert Hoover officially designated Key’s poem as the United States’ national anthem. A defining weapon of the time, the artillery of the War of 1812 echoes through this patriotic hymn.   Legacy War of 1812 commemorative stamp depicting the USS Constitution, 2012. Source: Smithsonian Institution   Aside from being memorialized in the national anthem, artillery from the War of 1812 had an impact on American military strategy for several decades. As the first war fought by the nascent US Army, the tactics and techniques developed during the War of 1812 would go on to define the US military’s offensive and defensive doctrine during the Mexican-American War and the Civil War.   Less than a decade after the War of 1812, the United States introduced the Monroe Doctrine, in which the American government threatened war with European powers seeking colonization or political interference in the Americas. Without a powerful standing army supported by effective artillery assets developed during the War of 1812, the Monroe Doctrine would have stood as an empty threat towards the European powers.   US artillery had played a decisive role in several victorious American battles at land and sea during the War of 1812, and would continue to serve as an important asset for American national security in the decades following the conflict.

  The tragedy of Armero was one of the most horrific natural disasters witnessed in Colombia’s history. Occurring almost 40 years ago, the tragedy was caused by the eruption of the Nevado del Ruiz Volcano in the central Andes Cordillera. The deadly eruption happened on November 13, 1985, and triggered the melting of lahars that buried an entire nearby village, Armero, killing most of its residents. Although the volcano had been silent for over 70 years, it had shown signs of possible eruption for several months before the tragedy.   Where Is Armero? Photo of Armero before the tragedy. Source: Q’hubo   Armero was the third-largest urban center in Tolima, Colombia. It was 48 km (30 m) away from the Nevado del Ruiz volcano and was an important agricultural center known for its rice production.   Volcanic activity in the region was not uncommon. It has been registered since the 16th century, with activity peaks during the 19th century. After the explosion of Mount Pelée in 1902 on the French island of Martinique, Nevado del Ruiz’s eruption is considered the second-largest volcanic event of the 20th century.   Nevado del Ruiz Volcano Aerial photo of Volcán Nevado del Ruiz by Georges Vitton, 2024. Source: LCDV   This snowy volcano is located in the northern part of the Andes volcanic belt between Tolima and Caldas in Colombia. More specifically, it is part of a national park, the Parque Nacional de los Nevados (Snowy Mountains National Park), which lies on the Pacific Ring of Fire.   The volcano has remained active since the Pleistocene. Typical eruptions include the expulsion of pyroclastic flows that can melt surrounding glacier ice and produce lahars, or volcanic mudflows. The volcano’s ice cover is an important potable water resource for nearby villages. However, due to climate change, it has been decreasing in recent years.   Volcanic activity and eruption events have been documented at Nevado del Ruiz since the 16th century, and especially during the 19th century. Because the last major eruption had happened 140 years before the day of this tragic event, for the locals, it was easy to ignore the potential threat. Moreover, smoke from the volcano had rarely been seen as a cause for alarm by nearby populations. Following the 1985 explosion, the most recent eruption happened in 2012, with the volcano expelling only gases and ash.   View of Volcán Nevado del Ruiz from the city of Manizales, a city nearby. N.A. Source: Alcaldía de Manizales   Although people had been aware of Nevado del Ruiz’s volcanic activity since early November 1984, geologists had identified increasing seismic activity in the region and a more visible expulsion of smoke from the different volcanic chimneys. Direct contact between magma and water produced an explosion on September 11 of the same year, leading local authorities to prepare evacuation plans and produce risk maps published in different national newspapers. Unfortunately, this information did not reach Armero’s population effectively.   One Year Later: The Night of November 13 Photos of Armero, Colombia. N.A. Source: infobae   At 3 p.m. on November 13, 1985, columns of ash were expelled from the volcano. By 7 p.m., ash rain had started to fall over the village. The director of the Colombian civil defense was informed about the peculiar events and issued recommendations to evacuate nearby villages. Some survivors have shared that the village mayor, informed of the imminent risk of eruption, walked the streets warning the people. Despite his efforts to save Armeros’ people, other authorities recommended that the people remain calm and return to their houses. At the same time, the Colombian Red Cross started organizing evacuation plans in nearby villages. At 9:09 p.m., the volcano erupted, throwing pyroclasts 30 km (19 mi) into the atmosphere. After the explosion, the Colombian National Geological Service recommended immediate evacuation. However, due to storms, these warnings never reached Armero’s authorities.   The volcano’s explosion melted 2% of the mountain’s glaciers, producing lahars that traveled down the mountain through descending river courses, reaching speeds up to 60 km (37 mi) per hour. Lahars mix mud, debris, and water. Before hitting the village, the main lahar traveled through the Lagunillas River, which neighbored Armero.   Photo of rescue activities after the Armero tragedy. Source: Clipintevé   Around 11:30 p.m., the first lahar reached the village, followed by the arrival of 350 million cubic meters of mud mixed with branches and rocks that reached 30 meters (98 ft) in depth. Almost instantaneously, nearly the entire village was submerged, destroyed below the mudflow. The mud crushed buildings and people and smothered many.   Absent warnings from the government, and due to the timing, with many already sleeping, 20,000 people died, corresponding to around 94% of Armero’s population. After the mud had covered the village and destroyed connecting bridges and roads, it was almost impossible for the emergency services to reach the people. Twelve hours after the event, the first emergency services could finally reach the survivors.   The Next Day: Desolation Photo of Armero after the tragedy, December 1985. Source: National Archives   The next day, emergency trucks came to begin removing bodies that were buried and stuck between rubble, rocks, and trees. Some of them were cremated. The total toll of affected people reached 230,000, and initial damages were calculated to be approximately USD $218 million. Because the lahars had destroyed the local hospital, wounded people were moved to hospitals in nearby urban areas, most of them forever displaced by the tragedy and separated from their families.   Playing Politics: Delayed Response Photo of Pope John Paul II visiting Armero. N.A. Source: Infobae   After the flooding, recovery operations for the victims were both slow and poor. Colombia’s political landscape was unstable, and the government was directing its attention to other issues. One week before the event, the Colombian Palace of Justice had been occupied by the M19 guerilla movement, which was garnering most of the country’s attention. At the international level, the eruption of Nevado Del Ruiz happened only two months after an 8.1 magnitude earthquake struck Mexico City, which limited the number of supplies sent by the international parties.   Despite the unstable landscape, less than a year after the catastrophe, on July 7, 1986, Pope John Paul II visited the site as part of his six-day tour in Colombia. There, the pope declared the terrain a holy ground. A high cross penetrated the now-dried mud, where the pope knelt and prayed.   Omayra Sánchez, Face of a Tragedy Photo of Omayra Sánchez by Frank Fournier, 1985. Source: Le Nouvel Obs   Omayra Sánchez was a 13-year-old girl who was trapped in the mud for 60 hours before she passed away. She became the symbol of the Armero tragedy because of her story of resilience and hope amid her unavoidable fate. After the flooding, her legs had been trapped in the rubble. A rescue team of divers tried to free her from the debris trapping her, only to realize that the arms of her aunt were holding her tightly from the depths of the water. Efforts to rescue her were broadcast on national television, and a picture of her taken by journalist Frank Fournier was named the photo of the year by World Press Photo of the Year in 1986.   In the subsequent years, Omayra became a source of inspiration for literature and music, in the works of writers such as German Santa María Barragán and Isabel Allende. Her figure also attracted worshipers, who have been trying to secure her beatification. Today, the site of her passing has become a place of pilgrimage and offerings for many who still commemorate and believe in her.   Armero Today Ruins of Armero, unknown photographer, 2021. Source: rtve   Driving between the cities of Ibagué and Honda, travelers pass by what is left of the village: to the right, abandoned houses half-buried, and to the left, half of a hospital still popping out from the ground. The site is visited by many people who come either as tourists or pilgrims to the sacred site for the curiosity of worship.   Every year, on November 13th, more visitors gather, and different commemorative activities occur. Some are survivors. Others are descendants of the victims. As an act of remembrance, the Colombian Army throws rose petals from helicopters while masses are celebrated on the holy ground. Five kilometers away, a new village called Armero-Guayabal was built to house thousands of survivors. After the tragedy, many orphaned children were lost; some were even kidnapped. However, despite some being rescued, tracking adoptions is basically impossible because of the lack of a functional registry system.   Front page of the website Fundación Armando Armero, portraying surviving children currently being searched for, 2024. Source: Fundación Armando Armero   Francisco González, one of the survivors, lost his father and brother on the day of the event and founded an organization called Armando Armero (Building Armero). This institution is currently fighting alongside other survivors to find the lost children who, in some cases, were adopted by foreign families. They have filed a complaint against the Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar (Colombian Institute for Family Well-Being), which, in 2021, declared that it did not have official records about the protocols used for rescuing and protecting the young survivors.   Lessons Learned Aerial photo of Armero after being submerged by lahars, 1985. Source: Cerosetenta   The incredible number of deaths in Armero was caused, in significant part, by misinformation and the inability of mass media to deliver an effective warning message. Geological services could not communicate in a timely fashion with local emergency services in Armero, while local people ignored the signs of imminent danger, beginning with the ash rain that fell that afternoon.   In 1985, Colombia did not have the proper live geological measurement equipment. However, after the Armero tragedy, different geological monitoring services and technologies in Colombia were improved and developed, and today cover 25 active volcanic zones out of 50 present in the nation’s territory. In 1988, Colombia created the Sistema Nacional para la Prevención y Atención a Desastres—SNPAD (National System for Disaster Prevention and Response), and in 2012, the Sistema Nacional de Gestión de Riesgo de Desastres—SNGRD (National Disaster Risk Management System). These, together with the Servicio Geológico Colombiano—SGC (National Geological Service), are today the institutions that work together to safeguard vulnerable communities in high-risk disaster zones. Armero also testified to the importance of an effective preventive organization that takes into consideration Colombia’s complex geological characteristics, which must entail collaboration between government and scientific institutions.   Aerial photograph taken over Armero after the lahars wiped out the village, 1985. Source: Infobae   The Amero tragedy is a reminder of the devastation volcanic eruptions can have on nearby urban and rural areas and how preparedness is a vital tool to mitigate such risks. In the case of Armero, miscommunication and misinformation exacerbated the loss of lives, which had a long-lasting social impact on the country, especially for the survivors. Lastly, the search for the young survivors of the tragedy reflects how important it is to have effective rescue and protection protocols in place in the aftermath of disasters.

  From the baths of ancient Rome to modern-day recreation centers and parks, people have always loved a good outing. In 18th- and 19th-century London, and especially for the Victorians, this often included pleasure gardens—outdoor spaces that served as venues for concerts, zoos, and other entertainment.   Life in the Victorian Era Gin Lane by William Hogarth, 1751. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York   Charles Dickens’ famous portrayals of life in Victorian England as rough, dirty, and usually impoverished were typically spot on—the average lifespan was only 42 years. Unless one were fortunate enough to be born into a middle- or upper-class family, such as that of a doctor or wealthy business owner, most individuals ended up as factory workers or, if they were women, as domestic servants.   Both of these roles exploded in popularity around the Victorian era as a result of the rising middle class. Also referred to as the “bourgeoisie,” a term coined by contemporary thinker and economist Karl Marx, this new-money class emerged as a result of a strong currency and cheap labor. With most of Britain’s population moving to big cities, fine goods such as silverware, jewelry, and glass became more accessible than ever. The luxuries of the rich were not exclusive to the aristocracy anymore, and the Victorian era was arguably one of the golden ages of the middle class. However, as demand for goods and services rose, so did that for laborers.   Unlike their middle- and upper-class counterparts, working- and lower-class Victorians did not have access to luxuries. Poverty and mistreatment were rampant, and the crime rate was extremely high. Pressure from long hours and terrible living conditions drove many to drink excessively or use drugs, and the cities were dirty, often dangerous places.   Thanks to the growing population and the rapid industrialization of England, the countryside began being developed to accompany factories, housing, and urbanization. This left a lot of people—especially upper-class and aristocratic individuals—longing for a simple, picturesque country life. A harsh city life meant that many were eager to find escape through recreation such as sports, crafts, and travel.   Outdoor Recreation in Victorian England Skating, Henry Sandham, 1885. Source: Library of Congress   The Victorians were active people. Because passive entertainment such as radio or television shows had not yet been invented, sports in almost all forms were the pastimes of choice for many Victorian men. Bear baiting and cockfighting, two popular blood sports, were banned under Queen Victoria, but the advent of the locomotive was changing sports by allowing teams to travel. This meant that organized sports could now be played at a national level, leading to agreed rules and tournaments.   Two of the era’s most popular sports were football (soccer) and croquet. The Football Association Challenge Cup was created in 1871, and the FA Cup remains the oldest football tournament in the world. Football was intended as a game simply meant to keep people healthy, but within a few years, rules such as penalty kicks were needed in order to establish order in the wildly popular sport.   Whereas football was exclusively for men, croquet was enjoyed by everyone. The Victorians did not hold a flattering view of women, believing them to be inherently weaker and less skilled than men. As a result, they were not accepted in many sports, but croquet was seen as being simple and unskilled enough for anyone to play, and thus became popular as something men and women could do together.   In spite of these perceptions, however, plenty of Victorian women participated in sports. Activities such as rifle shooting, long-distance swimming, and golf tournaments were all very popular, and many schools even formed girls’ sports teams. Women became more and more visible outside of the domestic space, and the popularity of outdoor activities, especially sports, contributed to the changing image of women in society.   The Origins of the Pleasure Garden The Hanging Gardens of Babylon. Source: iStock   Finding pleasure in nature as part of entertainment came long before the Victorians. Although humans have enjoyed the natural world for thousands of years, the first depictions of nature as a form of entertainment specifically date back to 1500 BCE. One of many famous examples is a mural of patrons sitting leisurely, surrounded by trees, musicians, and dancers that was created for the Tomb of Nebamun, roughly around 1350 BCE. Likewise, many Victorians were familiar with classical history, including the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, created by King Nebuchadnezzar II for his homesick queen.   The Walls and Hanging Gardens of Babylon, W. T. Copeland & Sons, 1898. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York   The ancient Romans also enjoyed pleasure gardens, and likely served as the inspiration for their Victorian counterparts. Gardens were a popular place for gatherings, especially for women, and often featured music, dancers, games, and sports. As space in Roman cities grew scarcer, wealthy Romans crafted their luxury gardens to show off their status and to offer a refuge from urban life.   Among Rome’s most famous gardens was Caligula’s “Horti Lamiani.” Known for his violence and eccentricity, Emperor Caligula ruled over Rome from 37 CE until his assassination in 41 CE. As part of his massive residence, he crafted a garden of exquisite plant life and exotic animals, which he adorned with statues of colored marble and a full bathhouse. Caligula also kept animals in his private garden for entertainment, including deer, peacocks, and lions. Keeping animals was a feature that would continue to the Victorians, who built zoos in their gardens.   The Victorian Pleasure Garden Vauxhall Gardens by Thomas Rowlandson, 1784. Source: The Yale Center for British Art   The rising popularity of outdoor recreation, as well as the sense of claustrophobia and longing for country life brought on by industrialization, created a market for the Victorian-era pleasure garden. Although these private gardens had been around for quite some time, they experienced a unique explosion of popularity with the Victorians. They were often the highlight of the summer nightlife and provided their wealthy guests with dancing, music, and plenty to eat and drink under the stars. The cost to enter such a party, however, was too high for the average laborer. Two of London’s most well-known gardens, Vauxhall and Cremorne Gardens charged one shilling each for entry—for reference, in 1834, most laborers only earned about 10 shillings per week.   The Dancing Platform at Cremorne Gardens by Phoebus Levin, 1864. Source: Wikimedia Commons   For those more fortunate, however, the pleasure garden provided elegantly landscaped views that were described as being filled with, “fine pavilions, shady groves, and most delightful walks, illuminated by above one thousand lamps” by the English Gazetteer in 1751. Prominent artists also used the gardens as a place to display their latest works. Painters including William Hogarth and Francis Hayman were exhibited at Vauxhall, a show that is now considered Britain’s first public art gallery. Likewise, the architecture was created by artists inspired by settings around the globe because travel was becoming a more popular and accessible form of leisure. Gardens featured buildings such as Chinese-influenced pavilions and Italian piazzas, where nighttime entertainments were featured.   Drinking, dancing, and dining were the most frequent forms of entertainment found in a pleasure garden. Masquerade balls, filled with luxurious costumes, were popular at the time and often attracted prominent contemporary musicians. In 1764, an eight-year-old Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart performed a concert benefiting a hospital at the Ranelagh Gardens in Chelsea. But newer, more novel forms of entertainment also became popular as time went on. Exciting acrobatic performances, hot air balloon rides, fireworks, and zoos were among the attractions offered by gardens as they struggled to keep their wealthy clientele following the decline of the fad’s popularity.   Notable Gardens Descent of Madame Saqui, surrounded by fireworks by Thomas Kelly, 1822. Source: New York Public Library   Vauxhall Gardens was the first true pleasure garden, having opened in 1732. Much unlike modern parks and gardens, Vauxhall did not open its gates until five or six PM and would remain open until the last visitors left—which could be as late as the next morning. However, during the day, some parts of the gardens were open to families, where they could take a walk or play in the park.   It was only when night fell that the park revealed its most famous attraction: thousands of glass lamps. The garden also hosted a number of world-famous guests, especially in the Victorian era, when managers were strategizing new and more exciting ways to attract visitors. Among these celebrities was tightrope walker and dancer Marguerite-Antoinette Lalanne, also known as Madame Saqui. Already a world-renowned sensation, Madame Saqui performed frequently at the gardens and was known for her spectacular finale, where she ran a tightrope across the gardens as fireworks exploded in the background.   Vauxhall Gardens shewing the Grand Walk by Benjamin Cole. Source: Yale Center for British Art   Ten years after Vauxhall’s opening, Ranelagh Gardens came into operation. Set near Chelsea Hospital, patrons to this garden could arrive by foot or carriage via the roads, or by boat, as the garden overlooked the River Thames. Although Ranelagh also offered beautiful natural landscapes, it set itself apart with the construction of a massive rotunda, where events could be held even in poor weather. The rotunda was heated, which meant Ranelagh was able to stay open significantly longer in the year than strictly outdoor gardens. Around the rotunda, the gardens featured a Chinese pagoda, a canal, and a temple of Pan.   All this luxury came at a price, however—the entrance fee to Ranelagh was more than double that of Vauxhall, a steep price of two shillings and a sixpence.   London’s third garden was Cremorne Gardens, which opened officially in 1845. Previously, the gardens had been the house of Viscount Cremorne, and they had changed hands and purposes several times before becoming Cremorne Gardens.   Like the other gardens, Cremorne offered a competitive array of entertainment to attract its guests. Aside from the gardens, there was an American bowling alley, a circus, a marionette theater, and weekly fireworks shows. However, Cremorne’s later years earned it a less-than-flattering reputation as home to a seedier crowd. In spite of the owner’s best attempts to keep the garden’s reputation intact with renovations and competitive attractions, it was heavily criticized as being “in the possession of Lost Women and their male friends and abettors,” and a pamphlet circling in 1876 referred to it as “nursery of every kind of vice.”   What Happened to Pleasure Gardens? An inside View of the Rotundo in Ranelagh Gardens by Nathaniel Parr after Antonio Canaletto. Source: The Yale Center for British Art   Pleasure gardens began to decline in popularity as Victorians moved on to other forms of entertainment, such as casinos and art galleries, and the trend died out as many often do. Additionally, as was the case with Cremorne, many fell into a state of disrepair, and became hotspots for criminals; others were damaged during bombings in the world wars. The expansion of the railroad also changed Victorian life, giving people a new, faster, and now more accessible mode of travel. Although public parks are now a staple of daily life, the flashy entertainment, lavish guests, and grand parties of pleasure gardens are a relic of the Victorian age.

We take for granted that the Christmas Season entails children are home from school, festive meals are being prepared, airports are crowded as people rush home to their families and parties are in full swing, all in anticipation of the jolly old elf Santa Claus’s arrival. Not many people realize though that all of those traditions have their origins in the Civil War.Lloyd W Klein explains. The religious nature of the holiday season upon us aside, this time of year has been a time of celebration and gift giving for centuries. The Twelve Days of Christmas and many other traditional songs, as well as Dickens’s Christmas Carol, show that this is a celebration time that goes way back in the European culture. This week we are going to trace how the Civil War led to the making of Christmas as a secular, national holiday.Unsurprisingly, the story is at base a political one. On Christmas Day 1861, President Lincoln chose to host a party at the White House. It was a crucial political moment because Mr Lincoln had a brewing international crisis that he had to stop before it got out of hand.On Christmas Day 1862, the country was in a national panic. Setbacks in the war had made it anything but a happy season. On this day, Mr and Mrs Lincoln did something that seems so much a part of the responsibility of the POTUS on this holiday that its astounding that it hasn’t always been traditional. And on Christmas in 1863, the Lincoln’s made yet another gesture of good will to the soldiers in the field.In 1861 President Lincoln sought to limit an international crisis by throwing a Christmas Party at the White House. The Trent Affair had led to the capture of the appointed Confederate representatives to Britain and France, John Slidell and James Murray Mason. War clouds had started to collect as the British Prime Minister insisted that the US had no right to capture these men on open seas. The capture occurred on November 8 and had become an international scandal after November 18. By Christmastime, there were rumors of British preparations for war and also significant diplomatic efforts were in progress. There were rumors of an invasion from Canada .So, there was a lot for Lincoln to “soft shoe” that day.In 1862, the Lincoln Family began a tradition to counter the public effects of The Battle of Fredericksburg, which had been a military disaster that spawned a political and public relations catastrophe. “What will the country say?” Lincoln asked. But the POTUS was a political mastermind, and he turned crisis into opportunity, The Lincolns pointedly went the various hospitals around Washington and visited and spoke with the wounded. No president had ever done this before. It showed that Lincoln the commander in chief was a sensitive leader who felt the people’s pain.The hospital visits were so popular, and so necessary, that Lincoln continued them. He brought his son Tad with him on many such days. Tad was deeply moved by the soldiers. So on Xmas 1863, wounded soldiers received gifts of books and clothing from the White House, with a covering note that said, “From Tad Lincoln”.And in 1864, General Sherman telegrammed Lincoln on December 22, 1864 announcing the capture of Savanah. By 1865, as the image above shows, Christmas was a celebration of victory in. the war.The soldiers on the battlefield were far away from home, many had never been outside their county in their lives let alone their state. Union soldiers used salt pork and hardtack to decorate Christmas trees. Others were treated to special meals; a captain from Massachusetts treated his soldiers to foods such as turkey, oysters, pies, and apples; Singing carols was popular, ones that remain popular today, but Christmas cards would not become popular until the 1870s.When we fly or drive home to Grandmothers House for Christmas, the origin of that tradition is the Civil War Fathers on both sides of the war were often given furloughs to return home for the holiday.Christmas originates with a significant religious meaning and yet it has become secular in its celebration. Almost no one knows that this trend began in the Civil War. And even more surprising to many, without Thomas Nast, Christmas as we know it probably wouldn’t exist. But Nast wasn’t interested so much in Christmas. He was interested in a much bigger issue.Nast was a cartoonist for Harper’s Weekly during the Civil War. If Nast wasn’t so interested in Christmas, why the recurrent theme? The 2 Nast cartoons depict Christmas experiences during the war. Identify the subjects of each and what was groundbreaking about them. The fact is that Nast was a first class political cartoonist who was a Union sympathizing propagandist using Christmas to draw on the emotions of the season to bring the country together. In the top cartoon, "Christmas Eve" (1862), a wreath frames a scene of a soldier's praying wife and sleeping children at home; a second wreath frames the soldier seated by a campfire, gazing longingly at small pictures of his loved ones.Another illustration features Santa in his sleigh, then going down a chimney, in the top left of the cartoon. Somber scenes below remind of a grimmer reality--an army marching through snow and a row of frozen graves that refers to the Union's recent failure to take Fredericksburg. But there is hope: Santa is coming!the January 3, 1863 issue of Harper's Weekly, Nast has an early caricature of Santa dressed in an American flag, with a puppet with the name "Jeff" written on it, Nast was inspired by the Belsnickel, part of the folklore in southwestern Germany, You’ll notice his sleigh is drawn by 2 scrawny reindeer. Nast’s 1864 Christmas cartoon in Harper’s. You can clearly see Lincoln beckoning men outside the door into the Christmas feast. But once again, he is making a political point. . Lincoln is seen ushering in the Confederates to re-join the US in a celebratory setting. of a holiday held in common. It is, of course, pure propaganda, but consistent with the war goal of reunification.Nast’s Christmas cartoons were so successful that he essentially created much of the holiday we know. Nast was not the only one to use Christmas as a propaganda tool. On the Union side, The New York Herald also engaged in propaganda. One illustration published in the paper included Santa Claus fuming that he could not reach southern children, due to the northern blockade. On the Confederate side, The Richmond Examiner described Santa to its young readers as "a Dutch toy monger" who was a New York/New England "scrub" and Hottentot that had nothing to do with traditional Virginian celebrations of Christmas. Nast had successfully made Christmas a Union holiday, and that is propaganda at a very high level. “In these two drawings, Christmas became a Union holiday and Santa a Union local deity,” writes Adam Gopnik in a 1997 issue of the New Yorker. “It gave Christmas to the North—gave to the Union cause an aura of domestic sentiment, and even sentimentality.” Nast’s 1863 Christmas cartoon showed the couple shown in 1862 reunited. Use of a Santa-like figure for propaganda purposes would eventually lead after the war to the elf myth of the jolly old Saint Nick. Between 1862 and 1886, Nast created thirty-three Santa Claus drawings. The iconic version of Santa Claus as a jolly man in red with a white beard and a sack of toys was immortalized in 1881, depicted by Nast in the cartoon attached, But he also gave the definitive appearance to Uncle Sam, America personified. Notice how they both have white beards, but one is tall and thin and the other short and plump. Nast didn’t invent Uncle Sam, as many people believe, but he did standardize his appearance and affect. Santa Claus derives from Sinterklaas, the Dutch rendering of St Nicholas, which was popularized in the 1823 poem “A Visit From St. Nicholas”. DGCC: Notice that the Santa in the 1881 cartoon is smoking an old-style Dutch clay pipe and has a Civil War saber (?toy) hanging from his waistband. He is carrying a knapsack on his back, not filled with clothes and war supplies anymore, but with toys. These details are deliberate; Nast is immortalizing a new personification: the former Union soldier is now older, happily smoking an old pipe, and raising a family 16 years after the war’s end. But the old soldier is still in him. Nast knew his business.It was also Thomas Nast who decided that Santa and his reindeer lived at the North Pole. After the war Nast purposely made the North Pole the home of Saint Nick so that no one else could use him for nationalistic propaganda like Nast himself did.It’s hard to imagine today, but Christmas was not always considered a “national” holiday. Because of the recognition that soldiers on both sides of the war, and of all religious backgrounds, found end of the year celebrations as fostering community and country, that view began to change. Politicians started to recognize in the post war period that if they wanted to bring the country together and heal wounds, Xmas was a natural solution.Puritans and Lutherans viewed non-sectarian celebrations of Christmas during the war as sacrilegious. They believed the day should be dedicated to fasting and prayer, and looked askance at such practices.  In Massachusetts, such parties were considered a waste of money and could be fined.The legal recognition of Christmas as a national holiday occurred when Representative Burton Chauncey Cook of Illinois introduced a bill in the U.S. Congress after the war. It passed in both houses of Congress, and President Ulysses S. Grant signed it on June 28, 1870. On June 26, 1870, Congress — led by Northern legislators — passed a law that made Christmas (along with New Year’s Day, Independence Day, and Thanksgiving) a federal holiday for federal employees in Washington, D.C. This was later extended nationwide. Ulysses S. Grant signed the law, partly as a gesture of reconciliation between North and South during Reconstruction. The site has been offering a wide variety of high-quality, free history content since 2012. If you’d like to say ‘thank you’ and help us with site running costs, please consider donating here.