Bacon’s Rebellion
Historical clothing design of the day is from the Events section, Bacon’s Rebellion was an uprising in 1676 in the Virginia Colony, led by a 29-year-old planter, Nathaniel Bacon. Each day a new design is chosen and an article is posted to highlight the historical significance of the design.
In 1674 a group of farmers on the Virginia frontier demanded that American Indians living on treaty-protected lands be driven out or killed. There were frequent conflicts between the groups. In September 1675, a group of Doeg Indians allegedly stole hogs from planter Thomas Mathews, in retaliation for his failure to pay them for trade goods. Colonists killed several Indians in the raiding party. In retaliation, the Doeg killed Mathews’ herdsman, Robert Hen.
Two militia captains, both with a history of aggression toward the Indians, went after the Doeg, but indiscriminately killed 14 friendly Susquehannock in the process. A series of retaliatory raids ensued. John Washington took a party from Virginia into Maryland, and with Maryland militia surrounded a Susquehannock fort. Although the Susquehannock held out for six weeks, when five chiefs came out to parley, the colonists attacked and killed them.
Seeking to avoid escalation of war with the tribes, Governor Berkeley advocated a policy of containment of the Native Americans. He proposed building several defensive forts along the frontier. Frontier settlers thought the plan both expensive and inadequate. They regarded it as an excuse to raise tax rates.
The Rebellion
When Berkeley refused to go against the Native Americans, farmers gathered around at the report of a new raiding party. Nathaniel Bacon arrived with a quantity of brandy; after it was distributed, he was elected leader. Against Berkeley’s orders, the group struck south until they came to the Occaneechi tribe. After getting the Occaneechi 
to attack the Susquehanock, Bacon and his men followed by killing most of the men, women, and children at the village. Upon their return, they discovered that Berkeley had called for new elections to the Burgesses in order to better facilitate the Indian problem.
The recomposed House of Burgesses enacted a number of sweeping reforms. It limited the powers of the governor and restored suffrage rights to landless freemen.
After passage of these laws, Bacon arrived with 500 followers in Jamestown to demand a commission to lead militia against the Indians. The governor, however, refused to yield to the pressure. When Bacon had his men take aim at Berkeley, he responded by “bearing his breast” to Bacon and told Bacon to shoot him himself. Seeing that the Governor would not be moved, Bacon then had his men take aim at the assembled burgesses, who quickly granted Bacon his commission. While Bacon was at Jamestown with his small army, eight colonists were killed on the frontier in Henrico County (where he marched from) due to a lack of manpower on the frontier.
On July 30, 1676, Bacon and his army issued the “Declaration of the People of Virginia.” The declaration criticized Berkeley’s administration in detail. It accused him of levying unfair taxes, appointing friends to high positions, and failing to protect frontier settlers from Indian attack.
Beginning to move against the Indians, Bacon and his men attacked the innocent (and friendly) Pamunkey. The tribe had remained allies of the English throughout other Indian raids. They were supplying warriors to aid the English when Bacon took power.
After months of conflict, Bacon’s forces, numbering 300-500 men, moved to Jamestown. They burned the colonial capital to the ground on September 19, 1676. Outnumbered, Berkeley retreated across the river. Before an English naval squadron could arrive to aid Berkeley and his forces, Bacon died from dysentery on October 26, 1676. John Ingram took over leadership of the rebellion, but many followers drifted away. The Rebellion didn’t last long after that. Berkeley launched a series of successful amphibious attacks across the Chesapeake Bay and defeated the rebels. His forces defeated the small pockets of insurgents spread across the Tidewater. Thomas Grantham, a Captain of a ship cruising the York River, used cunning and force to disarm the rebels. He tricked his way into the garrison of the rebellion, and promised to pardon everyone involved once they got back onto the ship. However, once they were safely ensconced in the hold, he trained the ship’s guns on them, and disarmed the rebellion. Through various other tactics, the other rebel garrisons were likewise overcome.
Governor Berkeley returned to power. He seized the property of several rebels for the colony and executed 23 men by hanging, including the then-governor of Virginia, William Drummond. After an investigative committee returned its report to King Charles II, Berkeley was relieved of the governorship, and recalled to England.
Sherman’s March to the Sea
Historical clothing design of the day is from the Quotes section, General William Tecumseh Sherman is credited as saying “War is Hell“. Each day a new design is chosen and an article is posted to highlight the historical significance of the design.
Sherman’s March to the Sea is the name commonly given to the Savannah Campaign conducted around Georgia during November and December 1864 by Maj. Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman of the Union Army in the American Civil War. The campaign began with Sherman’s troops leaving the captured city of Atlanta, Georgia, on November 15 and ended with the capture of the port of Savannah on December 21. It inflicted significant damage, particularly to industry and infrastructure, and also to civilian property. Military historian David J. Eicher wrote that Sherman “defied military principles by operating deep within enemy territory and without lines of supply or communication. He destroyed much of the South’s potential and psychology to wage war.”
Background and orders for the March
Sherman’s March to the Sea followed his successful Atlanta Campaign of May to September 1864. He and the U.S. Army commander, Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, believed that the Civil War would end only if the Confederacy’s strategic, economic, and psychological capacity for warfare were decisively broken. Sherman therefore applied the principles of scorched earth: he ordered his troops to burn crops, kill livestock and consume supplies. Finally he destroyed civilian infrastructure along his path of advance. This policy is often considered a component strategy of total war. The recent re-election of President Abraham Lincoln ensured that short-term political pressure would not be applied to restrain these tactics.
The second objective of the campaign was more traditional. Grant’s armies in Virginia continued to be in a stalemate against Robert E. Lee’s army, besieged in Petersburg, Virginia. By moving in Lee’s rear, performing a massive turning movement against him, Sherman could possibly increase pressure on Lee, allowing Grant the opportunity to break through, or at least keep Southern reinforcements away from Virginia.
The campaign was designed to be similar to Grant’s innovative and successful Vicksburg Campaign, in that Sherman’s 
armies would reduce their need for traditional supply lines by “living off the land” after their 20 days of rations were consumed. Foragers, known as “bummers,” would provide food seized from local farms for the Army while they destroyed the railroads and the manufacturing and agricultural infrastructure of the state. In planning for the march, Sherman used livestock and crop production data from the 1860 census to lead his troops through areas where he believed they would be able to forage most effectively. Cotton gins and storage bins were to be destroyed because Southerners used the cotton to trade for guns and other supplies. The twisted and broken railroad rails that the troops heated over fires and wrapped around tree trunks and left behind became known as “Sherman’s neckties.”
The March
Both President Lincoln and General Grant had serious reservations about Sherman’s plans. Still, Grant trusted Sherman’s assessment and on November 2, 1864, he sent Sherman a telegram stating simply, “Go as you propose.” The 300-mile march began on November 15.
Sherman’s personal escort on the march was the 1st Alabama Cavalry Regiment, a unit made up entirely of Southerners who remained loyal to the Union.
The two wings of the army attempted to confuse and deceive the enemy about their destinations; the Confederates could not tell from the initial movements whether Sherman would march on Macon, Augusta, or Savannah. Howard’s wing, led by Kilpatrick’s cavalry, marched south along the railroad to Lovejoy’s Station, which caused the defenders there to conduct a fighting retreat to Macon. The cavalry captured two Confederate guns at Lovejoy’s Station, and then two more and 50 prisoners at Bear Creek Station. Howard’s infantry marched through Jonesboro to Gordon, southwest of the state capital, Milledgeville. Slocum’s wing, accompanied by Sherman, moved to the east, in the direction of Augusta. They destroyed the bridge across the Oconee River and then turned south.
The state legislature called for Georgians to “Die freemen rather than live [as] slaves” and fled the capital. Hardee arrived from his headquarters at Savannah and realized that that city, not Macon, was Sherman’s target. He ordered the Confederate cavalry under Wheeler to harass the Federal rear and flanks while the militiamen under Smith hurried eastward to protect the seaport city. On November 23, Sherman’s staff held a mock legislative session in the state capitol, jokingly voting Georgia back into the Union and playing cards.
The first real resistance was felt by Howard’s right wing at the Battle of Griswoldville on November 22. Wheeler’s cavalry struck Kilpatrick’s, killing three and capturing 18. The infantry brigade of Brig. Gen. Charles C. Walcutt arrived to stabilize the defense, and the division of Georgia militia launched several hours of badly coordinated attacks, eventually retreating with about 1,100 casualties (of which about 600 were prisoners), versus the Union’s 100.
Several small actions followed. Wheeler and some infantry struck in a rearguard action at Ball’s Ferry on November 24 and November 25. While Howard’s wing was delayed near Ball’s Bluff, the 1st Alabama Cavalry (a Federal regiment) engaged Confederate pickets. Overnight, Union engineers constructed a bridge 2 miles away from the bluff across the Oconee River, and 200 soldiers crossed to flank the Confederate position. On November 25–26 at Sandersville, Wheeler struck at Slocum’s advance guard. Kilpatrick was ordered to make a feint toward Augusta before destroying the railroad bridge at Brier Creek and moving to liberate the Camp Lawton prisoner of war camp at Millen. Kilpatrick slipped by the defensive line that Wheeler had placed near Brier Creek, but on the night of November 26 Wheeler attacked and drove the 8th Indiana and 2nd Kentucky Cavalry away from their camps at Sylvan Grove. Kilpatrick abandoned his plans to destroy the railroad bridge and he also learned that the prisoners had been moved from Camp Lawton, so he rejoined the army at Louisville. At the Battle of Buck Head Creek on November 28, Kilpatrick was surprised and nearly captured, but the 5th Ohio Cavalry halted Wheeler’s advance, and Wheeler was later stopped decisively by Union barricades at Reynolds’s Plantation. On December 4, Kilpatrick’s cavalry routed Wheeler’s at the Battle of Waynesboro.
More Union troops entered the campaign from an unlikely direction. Maj. Gen. John G. Foster dispatched 5,500 men and 10 guns under Brig. Gen. John P. Hatch from Hilton Head, hoping to assist Sherman’s arrival near Savannah by securing the Charleston and Savannah Railroad. At the Battle of Honey Hill on November 30, Hatch fought a vigorous battle against G.W. Smith’s 1,500 Georgia militiamen, 3 miles south of Grahamville Station, South Carolina. Smith’s militia fought off the Union attacks, and Hatch withdrew after suffering about 650 casualties, versus Smith’s 50.
Sherman’s armies reached the outskirts of Savannah on December 10 but found that Hardee had entrenched 10,000 men in good positions, and his soldiers had flooded the surrounding rice fields, leaving only narrow causeways available to approach the city. Sherman was blocked from linking up with the U.S. Navy as he had planned, so he dispatched cavalry to Fort McAllister, guarding the Ogeechee River, in hopes of unblocking his route and obtaining supplies awaiting him on the Navy ships. On December 13, William B. Hazen’s division of Howard’s army stormed the fort in the Battle of Fort McAllister and captured it within 15 minutes. Some of the 134 Union casualties were caused by torpedoes, a name for crude land mines that were used only rarely in the war.
Hardee decided not to surrender but to escape. On December 20, he led his men across the Savannah River on a pontoon bridge hastily constructed of rice flats. The next morning, Savannah Mayor R. D. Arnold rode out to formally surrender, in exchange for General Geary’s promise to protect the city’s citizens and their property. Sherman’s men, led by Geary’s division of the XX Corps, occupied the city the same day.
Read More about William Tecumseh Sherman on Wikipedia.
World War II Heavy Water Sabotage in Norway
Historical clothing design of the day is from the Air Force – Roundels series, the the roundels used by the Royal Norwegian Air Force (RNoAF). Each day a new design is chosen and an article is posted to highlight the historical significance of the design.
The Norwegian heavy water sabotage was a series of actions undertaken by Norwegian saboteurs during World War II to prevent the German nuclear energy project from acquiring heavy water (deuterium oxide), which could be used to produce nuclear weapons. In 1934, at Vemork, Norsk Hydro built the first commercial plant capable of producing heavy water as a byproduct of fertilizer production. It had a capacity of 12 t (13 short tons) per year. During World War II, the Allies decided to remove the heavy water supply and destroy the heavy water plant in order to inhibit the Nazi development of nuclear weapons. Raids were aimed at the 60-MW Vemork power station at the Rjukan waterfall in Telemark, Norway.
Prior to the German invasion of Norway on 9 April 1940, the Deuxième Bureau (French military intelligence) removed 185 kg (408 lb) of heavy water from the plant in Vemork in then-neutral Norway. The plant′s managing director, Aubert, agreed to loan the heavy water to France for the duration of the war. The French transported it secretly to Oslo, to Perth, Scotland, and then to France. The plant remained capable of producing heavy water.
The Allies remained concerned that the occupation forces would use the facility to produce more heavy water for their weapons programme. Between 1940 and 1944, a sequence of sabotage actions, by the Norwegian resistance 
movement—as well as Allied bombing—ensured the destruction of the plant and the loss of the heavy water produced. These operations—codenamed “Grouse,” “Freshman,” and “Gunnerside”—finally managed to knock the plant out of production in early 1943.
In Operation Grouse, the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) successfully placed four Norwegian nationals as an advance team in the region of the Hardanger Plateau above the plant. Later in 1942 the unsuccessful Operation Freshman was mounted by British paratroopers; they were to rendezvous with the Norwegians of Operation Grouse and proceed to Vemork. This attempt failed when the military gliders crashed short of their destination, as did one of the tugs, a Halifax bomber. The other Halifax returned to base, but all the other participants were killed in the crashes or captured, interrogated, and executed by the Gestapo.
Operation Gunnerside
British authorities were aware of the “success” of the Grouse team, and decided to mount another operation in concert with them. By this time the original Grouse team were being referred to as Swallow. On the night of 16 February 1943, in Operation Gunnerside (named after the village where SOE head Sir Charles Hambro and his family used to shoot grouse), an additional six Norwegian commandos were dropped by parachute by a Halifax bomber of 138 Squadron from RAF Tempsford. They were successful in landing, and encountered the Swallow team after a few days of searching on cross country skis. The combined team made final preparations for their assault, which was to take place on the night of 27/28 
February 1943.
Following the failed Freshman attempt, the Germans put mines, floodlights, and additional guards around the plant. While the mines and lights remained in place, security of the actual plant had slackened somewhat over the winter months. However, the single 75 m (246 ft 1 in) bridge spanning the deep ravine, 200 m (660 ft) above the River Maan, was fully guarded.
The force elected to descend into the ravine, ford the icy river and climb the steep hill on the far side. The winter river level was very low, and on the far side, where the ground leveled, they followed a single railway track straight into the plant area without encountering any guards. Even before Grouse landed in Norway, SOE had a Norwegian agent within the plant who supplied detailed plans and schedule information. The demolition party used this information to enter the main basement by a cable tunnel and through a window. Inside the plant, the only person they came across was the Norwegian caretaker (Johansen), who was very willing to cooperate with them.
The saboteurs then placed explosive charges on the heavy water electrolysis chambers, and attached a fuse allowing sufficient time for their escape. A British submachine gun was purposely left behind to indicate that this was the work of British forces and not of the local resistance, in order to alleviate reprisals. A surreal episode ensued when fuses were 
about to be lit: the caretaker was worried about his spectacles which were lying somewhere in the room (during the war new glasses were nearly impossible to acquire). A frantic search for the caretaker′s spectacles ensued, they were found — and the fuses lit. The explosive charges detonated, destroying the electrolysis chambers.
The raid was considered successful. The entire inventory of heavy water produced during the German occupation, over 500 kg (1,102 lb), was destroyed along with equipment critical to operation of the electrolysis chambers. Although 3,000 German soldiers were dispatched to search the area for the commandos, all of them escaped; five of them skied 400 kilometres to Sweden, two proceeded to Oslo where they assisted Milorg, and four remained in the region for further work with the resistance.
Operation Gunnerside was later evaluated by SOE as the most successful act of sabotage in all of World War II.
Read More about the Sabotage missions in Norway on Wikipedia
Coat of Arms of Croatia
Historical clothing design of the day is from the Air Force – Roundels series, the the roundels used by the Air Force of Croatia. Each day a new design is chosen and an article is posted to highlight the historical significance of the design.
The coat of arms of Croatia consists of one main shield and five smaller shields which form a crown over the main shield. The main coat of arms is a checkerboard (chequy) that consists of 13 red and 12 silver (white) fields. It’s commonly known as šahovnica (“chessboard”, from šah, “chess” in Croatian) or grb (literally coat of arms). The five smaller shields represent five different historical regions within Croatia.
History
The checkerboard coat of arms (šahovnica) is widely thought to have been created by Stephen Držislav in the tenth century. However, the falcons on a stone plate from the time of Peter Krešimir IV (today in Split) carry something that resembles a traditional Croatian chequy on their wings. It ranges in size from 3×3 to 8×8, but most commonly 5×5, like the current coat. It was traditionally conjenctured that the colours originally represented two ancient Croat states, Red Croatia and White Croatia, but there is no generally accepted proof for this theory. The oldest source confirming the coat as an official symbol is a genealogy of the Habsburgs, dated from 1512 to 1518. In 1525 it was used on a votive medal.
The oldest known coat of arms of Croatia (six-pointed star over a moon), coat of arms of Dalmatia and coat of arms of Slavonia (as well as the šahovnica) were all at times used as the Coat of Arms to represent the whole Croatia, especially in early heraldic period. Towards the Late Middle Ages the distinction for the three crown lands (Croatia ‘proper’, Dalmatia, Slavonia) was made. The šahovnica was used as the coat of arms of Croatia proper & together with the shields of Slavonia and Dalmatia was often used to represent the whole of Croatia in Austria-Hungary. It was used as an unofficial coat of arms of the Kingdom of Croatia adopted in 1848, and as an official coat of arms of the post-1868 Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. The two are the same except for the position of the šahovnica and Dalmatian coat of arms which are switched around & with different crowns used above the shield – the later employing St Stephen’s crown
(associated with Hungarian kings).
By late 19th century šahovnica had come to be considered a generally recognized symbol for Croats and Croatia and in 1919, it was included in the coat of arms of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later the Kingdom of Yugoslavia) to represent Croats. When the Banovina of Croatia was formed, the šahovnica (chequy gules and argent) was retained as the official symbol.
The Ustashe regime which had ruled Croatia during the World War II superimposed their ideological symbol, the letter “U” above or around the šahovnica (upper left square white) as the official national symbol during their rule.
After the Second World War, the new Socialist Republic of Croatia became a part of the federal Second Yugoslavia. The šahovnica was included in the new socialist coat of arms with superimposed red star as a socialist ideological symbol. It was designed in the socialist tradition, including symbols like wheat for peasants and an anvil for workers, as well as a rising sun to symbolize a new morning and a red star for communism.
During the change to multiparty elections in Croatia (as part of the collapse of Communist rule in Eastern Europe from the late 1980s), and prior to the establishment of the current design, the šahovnica, shedding the communist symbols that 
were the hallmark of Croatia in the second Yugoslavia, reappeared as a stand-alone symbol as both the ‘upper left square red’ and ‘upper left square white’ variants. The choice of ‘upper left square red’ or ‘upper left square white’ was often dictated by heraldic laws and aesthetic requirements.
The current design
On 21 December 1990, the post-socialist government of Croatia, passed a law prescribing the design created by the graphic designer Miroslav Šutej, under the aegis of a commission chaired by Nikša Stančić, then head of the Department of Croatian History at the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Zagreb.
The new design added the five crowning shields which represent the historical regions from which Croatia originated. They are, from left to right:
- the oldest known Croatian coat of arms: a golden six-pointed star (representing the morning star) over a silver moon on a blue shield.
- an older coat of arms of the Republic of Dubrovnik: two red stripes on a dark blue shield. The coat of arms on the flags and stone portals of Dubrovnik were painted black as a sign of grief by Dubrovnik’ s citizens after the invasion by Napoleon.
- the coat of arms of Dalmatia: three golden, crowned leopards, two over one, on a blue shield. This coat of arms originates from the Roman Emperor Diocletian who made his palace (the core of city of Split) the capital of the Western Roman Empire. His palace, to this day, still stands in Split.
- the coat of arms of Istria: a golden goat with red hooves and horns, on a dark blue shield.
- the coat of arms of Slavonia: two silver stripes on blue shield (representing the rivers Drava and Sava that mark the northern and the southern border of Slavonia), between them on a red field a black, running marten (kuna in Croatian – note national currency is related to the marten – Croatian kuna), above a six-pointed, golden star. This coat was to Slavonia was officially recognised by king Ladislaus Jagiello in 1496.
Some of the more traditional heraldic pundits have criticized the latest design for various 
design solutions, such as adding a crown to the coat, varying shades of blue in its even fields, and adding the red border around the coat. The government has accepted their criticism insofar as not accepting further non-traditional designs for the county coats of arms, but the national symbol has remained intact.
Unlike in many countries, Croatian design more commonly uses symbolism from the coat-of-arms, rather than from the Croatian flag. This is partly due to the geometric design of the shield which makes it appropriate for use in many graphic contexts (e.g. the insignia of Croatia Airlines or the design of the shirt for the Croatia national football team), and partly because the Pan-Slavic colours are present in many European flags.
The New York Sun’s Great Moon Hoax
Historical clothing design of the day is from the miscellaneous section, for the Great Moon Hoax. Each day a new design is chosen and an article is posted to highlight the historical significance of the design.
“The Great Moon Hoax” refers to a series of six articles that were published in the New York Sun beginning on August 25, 1835, about the supposed discovery of life and even civilization on the Moon. The discoveries were falsely attributed to Sir John Herschel, perhaps the best-known astronomer of his time.
Article
The articles described fantastic animals on the Moon, including bison, goats, unicorns, bipedal tail-less beavers and bat-like winged humanoids (“Vespertilio-homo”) who built temples. There were trees and oceans and beaches. These discoveries were supposedly made with “an immense telescope of an entirely new principle”.
The author of the narrative was supposedly Dr. Andrew Grant, who described himself as the travelling companion and amanuensis of Sir John Herschel, but Dr Grant was fictitious.
Termination
Eventually, the authors announced that the observations had been terminated by the destruction of the telescope, by means of the sun causing the lens to act as a ‘burning glass’, setting fire to the observatory.
Authorship
Authorship of the article has been attributed to Richard A. Locke, a Cambridge-educated reporter who, in August 1835, was working for the New York Sun. Locke never publicly admitted to being the author, while rumours persisted that others were involved. Two other men have been noted in connection with the hoax: Jean-Nicolas Nicollet, a French astronomer travelling in America at the time (though he was in Mississippi, not New York, when the moon-hoax issues appeared), and Lewis Gaylord Clark, editor of the Knickerbocker Magazine. However, there is no good evidence to indicate that anyone but Locke was the author of the hoax.
Assuming that Richard A. Locke was the author, his intentions were probably, first, to create a sensational story which would increase sales of the New York Sun, and, second, to ridicule some of the more extravagant astronomical theories that had recently been published. For instance, in 1824, Franz von Paula Gruithuisen, professor of Astronomy at Munich University, had published a paper titled “Discovery of Many Distinct Traces of Lunar Inhabitants, Especially of One of Their Colossal Buildings”. Gruithuisen claimed to have observed various shades of color on the lunar surface, which he correlated with climate and vegetation zones. He also observed lines and geometrical shapes, which he felt indicated the 
existence of walls, roads, fortifications, and cities.
However, a more direct object of Locke’s satire was certainly Rev. Thomas Dick, who was known as “The Christian Philosopher” after the title of his first book. Dick had computed that the Solar System contained 21,891,974,404,480 (21+ trillion) inhabitants. In fact, the Moon alone, by his count, would contain 4,200,000,000 inhabitants. His writings were enormously popular in the United States, his fans including intellectual luminaries such as Ralph Waldo Emerson.
Reaction and Effect
According to legend, the New York Sun’s circulation increased dramatically because of the hoax and remained permanently greater than before, thereby establishing the New York Sun as a successful paper. However, the degree to which the hoax increased the paper’s circulation has certainly been exaggerated in popular accounts of the event. It was not discovered to be a hoax for several weeks after its publication and, even then, the newspaper did not issue a retraction.
Herschel was initially amused by the hoax, noting that his own real observations could never be as exciting. He became annoyed later when he had to answer questions from people who believed the hoax was serious.
The story may also have inspired Edgar Allan Poe to write and publish “The Balloon-Hoax” in the same newspaper on April 13, 1844.
Poe had published his own Moon hoax in late June 1835, two months before the similar Locke Moon hoax, in the Southern Literary Messenger entitled “Hans Phaall–A Tale”, later republished as ““. The story was reprinted in the New York Transcript on September 2–5, 1835 under the headline “Lunar Discoveries, Extraordinary Aerial Voyage by Baron Hans Pfaall.” The story is regarded as one of the first science fiction stories. Poe described a voyage to the moon in a hot-air balloon using a factually plausible scenario. Pfaall lived for five years on the Moon with lunarians and sent back a lunarian to earth. The Poe Moon hoax was less successful because of the satiric and comical tone of the account. Locke was able to upstage Poe and to steal his thunder. In 1846, Poe would write a biographical sketch of Locke as part of his series “The Literati of New York City” which appeared in Godey’s Lady’s Book.
Check out by Matthew Goodman for more information on the Great Moon Hoax
Follow Me!
Sponsors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
