Connect with us

News

The explosive history of fireworks, from ancient China to Revolutionary America

Published

on

The explosive history of fireworks, from ancient China to Revolutionary America

Spectators watch as fireworks erupt over the Washington Monument on July 4, 2022, in Washington, D.C.

Nathan Howard/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Nathan Howard/Getty Images

If you don’t see them, you hear them. On any July Fourth or New Year’s Eve, it’s common to experience the loud pop of a firework or see it colorfully explode into the sky and hang there briefly.

Pyrotechnic amusements from sparklers to Roman candles have long been a staple of celebrations in the U.S. and beyond, helping to mark national holidays, sporting events and more.

“They have become a global phenomenon, and they have become almost, if you like, the accepted way in which big events are celebrated,” said John Withington, author of the upcoming book, A History of Fireworks from Their Origins to the Present Day.

Advertisement

But the elaborate, computer-controlled displays of contemporary fireworks shows are a long way from the medium’s simpler beginnings in ancient China.

Fireworks began in ancient China before spreading West

The thinking goes that someone living in China around the first century B.C. threw a piece of bamboo on a fire and it exploded with a bang. Bamboo stalks contain air pockets that can expand and blow up in extreme heat. According to Withington, Chinese travelers would carry bamboo on journeys in case they needed to create a loud noise to scare away wild animals.

The next major development came around the ninth century, when gunpowder was invented. Chinese fabricators loaded up bamboo stalks with gunpowder to create perhaps the world’s first manufactured fireworks, and later began using paper tubes as well, History.com said. These were deployed to ward off evil spirits and celebrate births and weddings, according to the Smithsonian.

By the 12th century, fireworks were being lit for entertainment purposes in China’s imperial court, Withington said. Rudimentary fireworks then made their way to Europe around the 14th century, where Italian artists constructed displays resembling theatrical sets called “machines” and set off fireworks inside them.

Fireworks became even more complex thanks to advances in chemistry. The 19th century saw potassium chlorate used to elicit brilliant colors in fireworks, such as red and green, and enhance their brightness, according to Withington.

Advertisement

Over the years, innovations in technology led to some curious suggestions for how fireworks could help solve modern problems. Whalers experimented with rocket-powered harpoons in the late 1800s, and inventor Gerhard Zucker attempted to use pyrotechnic rockets to deliver mail in the 1930s.

A July Fourth tradition

Europeans who made their way to the Americas brought fireworks with them. It’s possible that Capt. John Smith, who was saved by Pocahontas according to legend, set off fireworks in Jamestown in 1608.

On July 3, 1776, the day after the Continental Congress voted for independence from Great Britain, John Adams wrote a letter to his wife, Abigail, imagining future celebrations of the occasion. (Though Congress voted for the Declaration of Independence on the 2nd, it was approved, signed and printed on the 4th.) Adams suggested those observances should include “illuminations,” or fireworks.

“It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more,” Adams wrote.

The following year, one of the first organized July Fourth celebrations was held in Philadelphia and included a fireworks display. “The evening was closed with the ringing of bells, and at night there was a grand exhibition of fireworks (which began and concluded with thirteen rockets) on the Commons, and the city was beautifully illuminated,” a story in the Pennsylvania Evening Post reported.

Advertisement

To critics, however, fireworks weren’t just a flashy racket — they were also deadly. On Independence Day of 1903, more than 460 people were killed in fireworks accidents, according to Withington.

A Pennsylvania attorney named Charles Pennypacker wrote in a letter to the Philadelphia Inquirer that year that Americans should hold a “quiet and sane observance” of the holiday. They could take a trolley ride, sit under a tree or bake a cake, Pennypacker suggested.

It didn’t go over too well with some. “On July 3, 1904, so the day before Independence Day,” Withington said, “some local young people gathered outside his house and started letting off fireworks and generally creating mayhem.”

Still, the “Safe and Sane” movement gained traction among some city officials who hoped to create calmer July Fourth celebrations. Chicago’s mayor outlawed the discharge of fireworks, while Santa Fe held a beauty pageant in place of the typical festivities, according to Smithsonian Magazine.

Fireworks today

The interest in fireworks never fizzled out, and they remain available across almost the entire U.S. today.

Advertisement

Only Massachusetts bans all forms of consumer fireworks, according to the American Pyrotechnics Association (APA). Every other state and the District of Columbia permit the sale of some or all types of fireworks.

According to the APA, fireworks remain popular. Consumers bought 246.5 million pounds of fireworks last year and 436.4 million pounds the year before that, industry figures show.

Yet they continue to pose a safety risk both to professionals working with commercial-grade fireworks and those lighting the odd firecracker for fun.

According to a recent report by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, 9,700 people were treated in emergency rooms for fireworks injuries last year, eight of whom died. Two-thirds of the injuries occurred in the weeks before and after July 4.

But safety experts say there are some best practices people can follow to have a blast without getting hurt, such as lighting fireworks outside, not holding lit fireworks in your hand and not using fireworks when impaired by alcohol or drugs.

Advertisement

According to KCUR, fireworks can also pose a risk to human health by producing particulate matter and other pollutants and harm the environment by releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

News

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Published

on

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”

In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”.

He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.

This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.

Advertisement

“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.

Share

Key events

During his opening remarks, Senate judicicary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but highlighted four agencies: the Secret Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast Guard.

Democrats are demanding tighter guardrails for federal immigration enforcement, but a sweeping tax bill signed into law last year conferred $75bn for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which means the agency is still functional amid the wider department shuttering.

Share
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending