5 Eye-Opening Facts About the Dust Bowl

Author Timothy Ott
August 20, 2026

Love it?

Although the Great Depression was a challenging time for most Americans, a special distinction can be made for those who weathered the unique conditions of the Dust Bowl. Generally encompassing a 300,000-square-mile region of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, and New Mexico — although its effects were also felt farther north — the Dust Bowl was marked by the relentless accumulation of dry soil that blackened skies and ruined crops.

In the wake of poor farming practices and unusually low levels of rainfall, topsoil from the Great Plains swirled through towns, piled up on fence posts, and seeped through building cracks. People and livestock alike suffered adverse health effects from inhaling the contaminated air, although the status quo apparently suited the swarms of grasshoppers who devoured what remained of crop rows.

While it sounds like something out of a dystopian novel, the Dust Bowl was very much a real experience for millions of people who had to decide between sticking things out in an inhospitable climate or abandoning their homes for an unknown future. Here are five facts about what it was like to live through those years of uncertainty.

Credit: Smith Collection/Gado/ Archive Photos via Getty Images 

The Catastrophe Was Caused by Poor Farming Practices 

The Dust Bowl’s roots can be traced back to the late 19th century: Federal efforts such as the Homestead Act of 1862 lured settlers to the Great Plains, and by the early 1900s, much of the prairie’s native grasslands, which helped retain precious water in the soil, had been dug up. The problem intensified with increased demand for wheat during World War I, which led to a focus on this particular yield at the expense of sustainable crop rotation, while improved farming machinery such as the gasoline-powered tractor lured even more “suitcase farmers” to arid areas with the hope of cashing in on crops. 

The ramifications of this overfarming became apparent when the region was stricken by a series of droughts beginning in 1930, leaving wide swaths of overturned earth dry and loose, vulnerable to blowing away in high winds. The disaster impoverished the farmers, who struggled to grow suitable crops and attract customers amid the financial depths of the Depression.

What the U.S. Presidents Did Before Taking Office

Author Timothy Ott
August 20, 2026

Love it?

A look through the life journeys of all 45 people who have served as U.S. president reveals a general blueprint for ascending to the highest office in the land. Many spent a sizable chunk of their early careers in the military and/or as lawyers, before climbing the political ladder with increasingly prominent roles that garnered the national attention and support needed to make a successful run at the White House.

Of course, there is no one set path that leads to the presidency. Many future commanders in chief navigated unusual first jobs or failed ventures along the way. Here are nine early roles held by people who eventually became known for calling the shots from the Oval Office.

Credit: Jim West/ Alamy Stock Photo 

Abraham Lincoln: Tavern Owner

Abraham Lincoln held down an array of jobs during his young adult years in the town of New Salem, Illinois, although the one that often stands out to contemporary eyes is his stint as a tavern owner. To be specific, the venue Lincoln co-owned with his militia colleague William F. Berry was a “grocery,” a store that sold alcoholic beverages to be consumed on the premises. Because a license was needed for such transactions, Lincoln is sometimes described as the only licensed bartender to become president. Unfortunately, Berry supposedly spent too much time indulging in the liquor stockpile, and Lincoln sold his share of the store to his co-owner after less than a year. But the business relationship came back to haunt the future president when Berry died two years later, leaving Honest Abe responsible for the grocery’s debts.

Who Portrayed Abraham Lincoln Most Accurately?

Author Michael Nordine
August 20, 2026

Love it?

Only one person has been portrayed on-screen more than Abraham Lincoln, and he doesn’t actually exist: Sherlock Holmes. Honest Abe has been inspiring filmmakers since 1908, when Van Dyke Brooke directed The Reprieve: An Episode in the Life of Abraham Lincoln, and has since appeared in more than 300 movies. 

An unknown actor played the 16th president in The Reprieve, which concerned Lincoln’s pardon of the “sleeping sentinel” — a Union soldier who fell asleep on duty and was initially sentenced to death for his mistake. Given Lincoln’s status as one of America’s most revered leaders, it’s little surprise that the first movie made about him focused on his mercy and compassion — traits highlighted in just about every other film inspired by Lincoln. 

But which of these portrayals was most accurate? Before answering that, it’s worth taking a look at some honorable mentions.

Noteworthy Films About Lincoln

Credit: Sunset Boulevard/ Corbis Historical via Getty Images 

Young Mr. Lincoln (1939)

Before he was president, Lincoln worked as a lawyer. Oscar-winning director John Ford chose to focus on this era of Honest Abe’s life in his excellent biographical drama. Henry Fonda — another screen legend who received an Oscar nomination for his leading role in The Grapes of Wrath and also starred in such classics as The Lady Eve and 12 Angry Men before winning Best Actor for 1981’s On Golden Pond — was perfectly cast as the idealistic attorney defending two brothers who are falsely accused of murder.

Screenwriter and critic Frank Nugent lauded Fonda’s performance as one of those “once-in-a-blue-moon things: a crossroads meeting of nature, art, and a smart casting director. Nature gave Mr. Fonda long legs and arms, a strong and honest face, and a slow smile; the make-up man added a new nose bridge.” You could argue that on a physical level, Fonda captured Lincoln’s essence better than any other actor.

Why Do We Throw Rice at Weddings?

Author Kristina Wright
August 20, 2026

Love it?

If you’ve been to a few weddings, you probably know the flow by now: the vows, the kiss, and then the party, with a few time-honored traditions woven in. One of the most iconic rituals? Guests showering the newlyweds with rice as they make their grand exit. It’s a festive moment and makes for a great photo — but have you ever stopped to wonder where this tradition comes from?

What may seem like a simple gesture is actually rooted in centuries of symbolism. That tiny grain of rice carries big meaning, representing fertility, abundance, and good fortune — and the practice shows up in different forms across cultures and eras. Let’s take a look at how rice-throwing became a wedding classic, and why grain-tossing rituals have endured through the centuries.

Credit: Universal History Archive/ Universal Images Group via Getty Images 

Grains Were Linked to Ancient Fertility 

In ancient agricultural societies, fertility wasn’t just desirable — it was vital to both survival and spiritual life. Ensuring crops grew, families expanded, and communities thrived depended on a close relationship with the natural world. People believed that calling on the natural crop cycles — planting, harvest, and renewal — during a marriage could help ensure the couple’s future would be equally productive. Showering newlyweds with grains was a symbolic way of welcoming the life-giving forces of nature into the new union.

Among early cultures such as the Celts and Mesopotamians, native grains including wheat and barley were considered sacred symbols of abundance and growth. These grains played a role in wedding ceremonies as offerings to spirits or deities associated with fertility and harvest. In some traditions, they were thrown at the bride and groom to bless them with children and prosperity. The act of tossing grain physically reinforced the hope that their marriage would be as fruitful as a well-tended field.

We Tried To Write an Entire Article in Middle English

Author Nicole Villeneuve
August 20, 2026

Love it?

When William of Normandy invaded England in 1066, it began a transformation of the Old English language. The Norman conquerors replaced the Anglo-Saxon ruling class, bringing with them their Anglo-Norman language, which was based on Old French. Over time, the two languages blended. Old English grammar became simpler, and the English vocabulary expanded with the addition of French words. The result was a new stage of the English language: Middle English, spoken around 1100 to 1500.

During this time, Geoffrey Chaucer wrote The Canterbury Tales, one of the most famous examples of Middle English literature. Chaucer’s writing — and the English language in general — was not uniform at this time. Spellings varied and were often phonetic, and pronunciation differed by region; Chaucer often used whichever version of a word fit his rhyme. 

There were some differences between the Middle English alphabet and our modern alphabet. Middle English included letters such as “þ” (known as thorn) for the “th” sound, and some other letters — such as “u” and “v” or “i” and “j” — were interchangeable. There were also some common words we no longer use. Middle English used “thou” for informal speech and “ye” as a formal or plural form, both of which were replaced by “you.” And third-person verbs ended in “eth” or “th” (such as “goeth”), which was later simplified to “s.” During the Great Vowel Shift, which occurred between 1350 and 1600, the pronunciation of many words also changed. For example, in Middle English, “sheep” sounded more like “shape,” and “bite” sounded like “beet.” 

Another major shift occurred when the printing press was introduced to England in 1476, marking the start of a new stage of the language, known as Modern English. As printed books became more widespread, spelling and grammar became more consistent, and English began to take its current form.

Why Do We Call It ‘History’?

Author Bess Lovejoy
August 13, 2026

Love it?

The modern English word “history” comes partly from the Latin historia and partly from the French storie (or estoire), but those terms both trace their roots back to the same place. Not coincidentally, that place is one of the bedrocks of Western civilization: ancient Greece.

Credit: North Wind Picture Archives/ Alamy Stock Photo

Going back about as far as we can, the word “history” can be traced to the ancient Greek verb οἶδα (heda), meaning “to know.” From there, the Greek ἵστωρ (histōr) arose, which had a variety of meanings depending on the context. As a noun, it could mean “wise man,” “judge,” “witness,” or simply “one who knows.” As an adjective, it meant “knowing” or “learned.”

The Greek word historia evolved from that histōr root. It originally meant “a learning or knowing by inquiry,” “an account of one’s inquiries,” or simply “inquiry” or “narrative.” That word was borrowed into Latin (also as historia), where it meant “narrative of past events, account, tale, story.” Interestingly, although historia was borrowed from Latin into Old English as stær (or ster or steor) to mean “history, narrative, story,” our modern English word “story” comes from the French storie or estoire

What Did U.S. Money Look Like in the 1800s?

Author Timothy Ott
August 13, 2026

Love it?

While the Coinage Act of 1792 established the United States Mint and the dollar as the unit of currency for the fledgling nation, it was quite some time before a fully standardized monetary system took root. In the meantime, people in possession of valuable metals continued to use them for transactions, local banks offered their own currency, and foreign money continued to flow until being banned as legal tender in 1857.

Despite this relative instability, Americans today would largely recognize the various forms of currency that exchanged hands in the 19th century, even if the designs and denominations of the coins and paper bills often differed from those in circulation today. Here’s a glimpse at what money looked like as the United States came of age.

Credit: Heritage Images/ Hulton Archive via Getty Images 

Gold Coins

The 1792 Coinage Act stipulated that all U.S. coins were to feature a depiction of the goddess Liberty on the front, while gold and silver coinage also required the display of an eagle on the back. As a result, the gold eagle ($10), half-eagle ($5), and quarter-eagle ($2.50) coins that went into circulation in the 1790s were all engraved in this fashion through the 1800s. 

By the mid-19th century, the discovery of gold in California ushered a new wave of the precious metal into the economy, resulting in the creation of the new $1 piece, the $20 “double eagle,” and the octagonal $50 unit, aka the “slug.” Unusual denominations from this era include the $3 coin, which featured Liberty in a Native American headdress, and the $4 “Stella,” which displayed a five-pointed star instead of an eagle.

How the Postal Service Created the ZIP Code

Author Timothy Ott
August 13, 2026

Love it?

Even with the decline of letter writing in the digital age, the ZIP code remains an American institution, a neat five-digit number that caps an address and, like an area code, can serve as a point of pride and prestige.

Given the ZIP code’s place as an oft-used and universally recognized symbol, it may come as a surprise that the ZIP, short for “Zone Improvement Plan,” isn’t all that old. The system was enacted on July 1, 1963, within many of our lifetimes and just a few months before another famous entity, the Beatles, also arrived in the United States.

But unlike the mop-topped quartet, the five-digit zoning plan wasn’t immediately welcomed by Americans. Here’s a look at how the ZIP code came to be, and ultimately overcame a bumpy start to emerge as a signature accomplishment of the United States Postal Service.

Credit: Bettmann via Getty Images 

An Early Zoning System Came Out of World War II

Like many innovations, the ZIP code’s origins can be traced back to World War II. At the time, the Post Office Department, as the U.S. Postal Service was then called, was dealing with the loss of personnel to military duty, specifically the departure of experienced sorters who could properly funnel letters and parcels marked with incomplete addresses.

As a result, in 1943, the department assigned one- to two-digit zone numbers to more than 100 high-density urban areas across the country to help make sorting for these areas more efficient. The numbers were to be written on the address of the recipient after the city name, such as “Indianapolis 24, Indiana.”

Although the zone numbers provided some organizational relief, they only papered over the problem of keeping up with the ever-growing volume of mail. Fueled by the country’s postwar population and economic boom, the number of individual pieces of mail jumped from 33 billion in 1943 to 66.5 billion in 1962. By the latter date, a letter was handled by an average of eight to 10 postal employees, increasing the possibility of human error.

The issue wasn’t going unnoticed by the department’s employees. In 1944, a prescient postal instructor named Robert Moon sought to get ahead of the volume problem with his proposal of splitting the country into a network of regional processing centers, each marked by a three-digit code. Nine years later, another inspector, H. Bentley Hahn, completed a six-year study of the department’s outdated operations with a report titled “Proposed Reorganization of the Field Postal Service.”

But despite the modernization efforts of Postmaster General Arthur Summerfield, who introduced the country’s first automated post office in Providence, Rhode Island, in 1960, the department was still struggling to meaningfully address its problems as it faced down a new decade.

What Did Ancient People Dream About?

Author Bess Lovejoy
August 6, 2026

Love it?

For the ancient Greeks, Romans, and folks in other cultures, dreams were far more than idle nighttime fancies. They were powerful, often sacred experiences that shaped lives, politics, religious practices, and art. 

While ancient people likely dreamed about many of the same themes we do today — love, fear, death, power, the divine — their dreams were widely seen as significant messages, often believed to come directly from gods or supernatural forces. Ancient dreamers sought meaning in their visions, often finding answers to illness, moral dilemmas, or matters of state, and they acted on their dreams with great seriousness. Here’s a look at what people in ancient times likely dreamed about, and what they believed those visions meant.

Credit: Culture Club/ Hulton Archive via Getty Images 

Divine Messengers and Prophecy

One of the most common types of dreams in antiquity featured divine or semidivine figures delivering a message — what later Roman thinkers such as the scholar Macrobius classified as “oracles,” and later scholars have called “epiphany dreams.” These dreams usually involved a god, ancestor, or venerable figure announcing future events or prescribing actions to take.

A prominent example is Penelope’s dream in Homer’s Odyssey, where she sees an eagle slay her flock of geese. The eagle speaks, revealing himself as Odysseus and foretelling his return and vengeance. In another example, from ancient Sumer, King Eanatum I dreamed that Ning̃irsu — the Sumerian god of thunderstorms and floods — told him he would triumph in a war. And in Egypt during the 15th century BCE, a deity told Prince Thutmose IV that he would become pharaoh if only he freed the Sphinx from the sand engulfing its body.

In some early Christian writing, dreams offered opportunities for moral instruction, although it can be hard to distinguish between sleeping dreams and what we’d now be more likely to call visions. But it wasn’t unusual for dreams to influence early religion: Ptolemy I Soter, one of Alexander the Great’s generals, had a dream of a giant statue that led him to found the cult of Serapis.

Why Babies in Medieval Paintings Look So Weird 

Author Bess Lovejoy
August 6, 2026

Love it?

Spend any time gazing at medieval European paintings, and one question tends to emerge: What is going on with those babies? Far from the sweet, chubby cherubs we might expect to see, these infants often resemble balding middle-aged men, complete with wrinkled foreheads and dour expressions. What could possibly explain this bizarre artistic choice? To understand, we have to dive into how European art — and the perception of children — evolved from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance.

Credit: DEA / G. NIMATALLAH/ De Agostini via Getty Images 

Religion Influenced Art

The unsettling “man-baby” of medieval art wasn’t a mistake or the result of a lack of skill. These depictions were intentional, shaped by artistic and religious ideas of the Middle Ages (roughly defined as between the fifth century and 13th century). Chief among these ideas was the concept of the homunculus, Latin for “little man,” which influenced how artists portrayed Jesus Christ as an infant. In many medieval works, baby Jesus appears with a full adult face, sometimes even showing signs of male-pattern baldness. The idea was that Jesus, being divine, was fully formed and unchanged from birth (a notion referred to as “the homuncular Jesus”). This theological concept seeped into broader portrayals of children, especially since the majority of child depictions in medieval art were religious commissions — portraits of Jesus or the occasional saintly infant.

As a result, artistic conventions leaned heavily toward depicting children as miniature adults. There was little interest in anatomical accuracy or realism. Instead, medieval artists followed established norms that prioritized symbolic meaning and spiritual messaging over lifelike representation. These conventions flattened individuality; adults and children often looked similarly stylized.

It also didn’t help that painters in this period lacked full artistic freedom. Many were working within strict church guidelines or copying earlier models, so even if they had wanted to create more accurate depictions, they weren’t supposed to do so. This lack of realism means that children in medieval paintings are often difficult to recognize as such. Some appeared disproportionately large or small, while others simply looked like shrunken grown-ups.