Before insulin existed, diabetes was one of the deadliest diseases in the world. Many children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes died only months or years after learning they had the disease. Doctors understood that diabetes affected blood sugar levels, but they had no reliable way to treat it. Instead, patients were placed on extremely strict diets that often left them weak and starving.

The article History of Insulin explains, “Before the availability of insulin, the life expectancy of children with diabetes mellitus was short and the prognosis for the adult onset diabetes was very poor.” Because doctors had no effective treatment, “physicians Allen and Joslin endorsed fasting and calorie restricted diets for diabetes.” These starvation diets sometimes delayed death, but they could not cure the disease. Patients often became dangerously thin because they were forced to eat very little food in order to survive longer.

Scientists knew that the pancreas played an important role in diabetes, but they struggled to isolate the substance responsible for controlling blood sugar. According to the Diabetes UK article, “Attempts had been made to extract insulin from ground up pancreas cells, but they’d all proved unsuccessful.” The problem was that other tissues inside the pancreas destroyed the insulin before it could be used.

During the early 1920s, however, a small group of researchers in Canada changed medical history forever. Frederick Banting, Charles Best, John Macleod, and James Collip worked together to isolate insulin and develop it into a treatment that could save human lives. Their discovery quickly became one of the most important medical breakthroughs of the twentieth century.

Diabetes Before Insulin

Before insulin was discovered, diabetes was extremely difficult to treat. Patients with severe diabetes often experienced constant thirst, rapid weight loss, weakness, and exhaustion. Children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes almost always died because their bodies could no longer produce insulin naturally.

Doctors understood some parts of the disease, but they did not know how to stop it. Most treatments focused only on reducing symptoms instead of curing the condition. Starvation diets became one of the main methods used by doctors because reducing food intake sometimes lowered blood sugar levels temporarily.

The History of Insulin article explains that these treatments “resulted in some improvement of glucosuria and acidosis, decreased coma, and delayed death among children with diabetes.” Even so, patients still suffered greatly, and most eventually died from the disease.

Scientists continued studying the pancreas because they believed it released a substance that controlled blood sugar. The article explains, “Long before the discovery of insulin, it was hypothesized that the pancreas secreted a substance that controlled carbohydrate metabolism.” Researchers spent years attempting to isolate this substance, but impurities and toxic materials inside pancreatic extracts caused experiments to fail repeatedly.

Frederick Banting and the Beginning of Research

The breakthrough finally began in 1920 when Frederick Banting developed a new theory about how insulin could be isolated safely. Banting was a Canadian surgeon rather than an experienced scientist, but he became interested in diabetes research after reading medical articles about the pancreas.

The Diabetes UK article explains that Banting read research suggesting “insulin producing cells in the pancreas are slower to deteriorate than other pancreas tissue.” Banting realized that this discovery might allow scientists to destroy harmful pancreatic tissue while preserving the cells that produced insulin.

The article explains, “Banting realised that this might allow for the removal of insulin by breaking down the pancreas in a way that would leave just the cells that produce insulin intact.” 

Although Banting believed strongly in his idea, he knew he needed scientific support to test it. On November 7, 1920, he met with John Macleod, a professor at the University of Toronto who specialized in diabetes research. Macleod agreed to provide laboratory space, experimental dogs, and a student assistant named Charles Best.

The History of Insulin article explains that Macleod “granted him laboratory space, ten dogs for his experiments, a student research assistant (Charles Best), and provided supervision and guidance.” 

This partnership became the beginning of one of the most important scientific discoveries in modern medicine.

Early Experiments and Insulin

The insulin experiments officially began in May 1921. According to the Diabetes UK article, “On 17 May 1921 Banting, Best and Macleod first got together to begin their research.” 

The researchers worked mainly with dogs. They tied off pancreatic ducts to destroy parts of the pancreas while keeping the insulin producing cells alive. Afterward, they created pancreatic extracts and tested them on diabetic dogs whose pancreases had been removed.

The History of Insulin article explains that “the experiments began on May 17, 1921.” By September, the experiments began showing successful results. The article explains that “intravenous injection with their pancreatic extract, which they named isletin, lowered the blood glucose.” 

These results were extremely important because they proved that pancreatic extracts could lower blood sugar levels in diabetic animals. For the first time, researchers had strong evidence that insulin could become a treatment for diabetes.

The experiments were difficult and time consuming. Many failed completely, but Banting and Best continued working every day in the laboratory. According to the Diabetes UK article, “Progress was initially slow.” Still, the researchers noticed regular improvements in blood sugar levels during successful experiments.

The article explains that “By November, they’d successfully treated a dog with diabetes with their insulin extract for 70 days.” This achievement demonstrated that insulin could keep diabetic animals alive much longer than before.

James Collip and Purifying Insulin

Although the experiments on dogs were successful, another major problem still existed. The insulin extract was not pure enough for use in humans. Impurities inside the extract caused dangerous side effects and made the treatment unreliable.

To solve this problem, biochemist James Collip joined the research team in December 1921. The Diabetes UK article explains, “James Collip, a biochemist, joined the group to work on purifying insulin so it would be safe enough to be tested in humans.” 

Collip worked constantly to improve the insulin extract. His goal was to remove impurities while keeping the insulin effective. According to the article, “With his help, a more concentrated and pure form of insulin was developed.” 

This purification process became one of the most important parts of the entire discovery because insulin could not be safely tested on humans without it.

Leonard Thompson and the First Human Injection

In January 1922, the researchers attempted one of the most important medical experiments in history. A fourteen year old boy named Leonard Thompson became the first human patient to receive insulin treatment.

The Diabetes UK article explains, “In January 1922, Leonard Thompson, a 14 year old boy dying from type 1 diabetes, became the first person to receive an injection of insulin.” 

Leonard was extremely sick and close to death because of diabetes. Doctors hoped the insulin extract might save his life.

The first injection showed both promise and problems. According to the History of Insulin article, “The first injection of the pancreatic extract to a 14 year old boy by Banting and Best on January 11, 1922, caused a sterile abscess.” The injection lowered blood sugar somewhat, but the extract still contained impurities that caused complications.

Collip immediately continued purifying the insulin. He worked day and night to improve the extract before another injection was attempted.

Later in January, Leonard received a second injection. This time the results were historic. The Diabetes UK article explains, “This time it was a complete success and Leonard’s blood sugar levels become near normal, with no obvious side effects.” 

The article then states, “For the first time in history, type 1 diabetes was not a death sentence.” 

The successful treatment of Leonard Thompson changed medicine forever. Doctors now had a treatment capable of saving patients who otherwise would have died.

The International Announcement of Insulin

After the successful human treatments, news about insulin spread quickly throughout the medical world. Researchers and doctors recognized immediately that the discovery could transform diabetes treatment permanently.

The Diabetes UK article explains, “On 3 May 1922, Macleod announced the discovery of insulin to the international medical community.” Macleod presented the research at a meeting of the Association of American Physicians in Washington.

The article also explains that this was “the first time the team used the word ‘insulin’.” 

Doctors and scientists responded with excitement because the treatment offered hope to diabetic patients around the world.

Insulin Belongs to the World

As insulin became more successful, questions arose about patents and ownership. Banting and the other researchers believed insulin should remain available to everyone who needed it instead of becoming a private source of profit.

The Diabetes UK article explains, “On 23 January 1923, Banting, Collip and Best were awarded U.S. patents on insulin and the method used to make it.” However, instead of keeping the patents for themselves, the researchers sold them to the University of Toronto for only one dollar each.

The article explains, “Banting famously said, ‘Insulin does not belong to me, it belongs to the world.’” 

This decision helped insulin become widely available much more quickly.

Mass Production and Worldwide Expansion

As reports of insulin’s success spread, demand increased rapidly. Pharmaceutical companies began working with the researchers to produce insulin on a much larger scale.

According to the Diabetes UK article, “Eli Lilly become the first manufacturer to mass produce insulin.” In October 1923, the company began shipping commercial insulin supplies.

The History of Insulin article explains that early insulin production still faced challenges. “Eli Lilly began producing insulin from animal pancreas but fell short of the demand, and the potency varied up to 25% per lot.” 

Scientists continued improving insulin production methods to make the medicine more reliable and more widely available. The article explains, “The development of an isoelectric precipitation method led to a purer and more potent animal insulin.” 

Insulin also spread internationally during 1923. The History of Insulin article explains, “In 1923, August Krogh, from the University of Copenhagen, met with Banting and Macleod to learn more about insulin because his wife had diabetes mellitus.” 

Krogh later helped establish insulin production in Scandinavia, allowing the treatment to reach even more patients.

The Nobel Prize

The discovery of insulin quickly became recognized as one of the greatest medical achievements in history. In 1923, Frederick Banting and John Macleod received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.

The Diabetes UK article explains, “In recognition of their life saving discovery, Banting and Macleod were jointly awarded the 1923 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.” 

The Nobel Prize helped make the insulin researchers internationally famous. Banting shared part of his prize money with Charles Best, while Macleod shared his portion with James Collip. This reflected the teamwork involved in the discovery.

The Significance of Insulin

The discovery and development of insulin during the 1920s completely transformed medicine. Before insulin, severe diabetes almost always led to death. After insulin became available, millions of people gained the chance to survive and live much longer lives.

The History of Insulin article explains, “The discovery of insulin in 1922 marked a major breakthrough in medicine and therapy in patients with diabetes.” 

The development of insulin also demonstrated the importance of scientific cooperation. Banting, Best, Macleod, and Collip all contributed different skills to the project. Without their combined efforts, insulin might not have been discovered when it was.

The success of insulin encouraged future medical research as well. Scientists realized that diseases once considered hopeless could potentially be treated through careful experimentation and teamwork.

Today, historians continue studying the discovery of insulin because it remains one of the most important medical breakthroughs in modern history. Millions of people around the world still rely on insulin every day, and the events of the 1920s permanently changed diabetes treatment forever.

Timeline of Events

1918 – Doctors mainly use starvation diets to treat diabetes.

7 November 1920 – Frederick Banting meets John Macleod to discuss insulin research.

17 May 1921 – Banting, Best, and Macleod officially begin insulin experiments.

September 1921 – Researchers discover insulin extracts lower blood sugar in dogs.

10 November 1921 – Scientists successfully treat a diabetic dog for 70 days.

12 December 1921 – James Collip joins the research team to purify insulin.

11 January 1922 – Leonard Thompson receives the first insulin injection.

23 January 1922 – Purified insulin successfully treats Leonard Thompson.

3 May 1922 – Insulin is officially announced to the medical community.

23 January 1923 – Banting, Best, and Collip sell insulin patents to the University of Toronto for $1 each.

15 October 1923 – Eli Lilly begins mass production of insulin.

25 October 1923 – Banting and Macleod receive the Nobel Prize.

Works Cited

DIABETES UK. 2024. “100 Years of Insulin.” Diabetes UK. 2024. https://www.diabetes.org.uk/our-research/about-our-research/our-impact/discovery-of-insulin.

Quianzon, Celeste C, and Issam Cheikh. “History of insulin.” Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives vol. 2,2 10.3402/jchimp.v2i2.18701. 16 Jul. 2012, doi:10.3402/jchimp.v2i2.18701

At first, Hitler appeared to be a failed revolutionary whose political career had ended. He attempted to overthrow the German government by force, failed badly, and was arrested. However, the months that followed changed history. During his imprisonment in Landsberg Prison, Hitler wrote Mein Kampf, a book that explained his beliefs about nationalism, race, propaganda, leadership, and Germany’s future. Although many people ignored the book at first, it later became one of the most influential political writings of the twentieth century.

Who Was Adolf Hitler?

Adolf Hitler was born in Austria in 1889 and served as a soldier during World War I. After the war, he joined a small political group called the German Workers’ Party, which later became the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, also known as the Nazi Party.

Hitler quickly became an incredibly powerful speak. He blamed Germany’s problems on the Treaty of Versailles, communists, democratic politicians, and Jewish people. His speeches were emotional, angry, and dramatic. Many Germans who felt hopeless after the war listened carefully to his promises of national rebirth.

During the early 1920s, Hitler believed Germany was weak enough for a revolution. Inspired by Benito Mussolini’s successful march on Rome in Italy, Hitler hoped he could seize power in Bavaria and eventually take control of Germany.

Germany After World War I

Germany lost the war in 1918, and many Germans blamed the new democratic government for the defeat. The Treaty of Versailles, signed in 1919, forced Germany to pay massive reparations, reduce its military, and give up territory. Many Germans believed the treaty humiliated the country.
The German government during this period was called the Weimar Republic. Although it was democratic, many citizens viewed it as weak and unstable. Political groups on both the left and the right fought in the streets. Communist uprisings frightened conservatives, while nationalist groups claimed the government had betrayed Germany.

Economic problems made conditions even worse. By 1923, hyperinflation destroyed the value of German currency. Prices increased so quickly that ordinary people struggled to buy food. Workers carried wheelbarrows filled with money to stores because paper currency became almost worthless. Families lost life savings in only a few weeks.
These conditions created an environment where extremist political movements could gain support. Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party used fear, anger, and nationalism to attract followers.

The Beer Hall Putsch

On November 8, 1923, Hitler and his supporters entered a large beer hall in Munich where Bavarian leaders were giving speeches. Hitler interrupted the meeting and announced that a revolution had begun. He hoped government officials and military leaders would support his movement.
The next day, Hitler and thousands of supporters marched through Munich. The march ended violently when police confronted the Nazis near the Feldherrnhalle. Shots were fired, several people died, and the coup collapsed.

The Beer Hall Putsch failed completely. Hitler was arrested two days later and charged with treason.
At first glance, the event looked like the end of Hitler’s political career. Instead, it became the beginning of his national fame.

Hitler’s Trial and Public Attention

Hitler’s trial began in February 1924. Rather than being ashamed, Hitler used the courtroom as a political stage, giving long speeches defending his actions and attacking the German government. Newspapers covered the trial closely, and many Germans became familiar with Hitler for the first time. Some citizens viewed him as a dangerous extremist, but others saw him as a passionate nationalist trying to restore German pride.

The court treated Hitler surprisingly lightly. Although he was convicted of treason, he received a sentence of only five years in Landsberg Prison and served less than one year.
This soft punishment reflected how sympathetic some judges and officials were toward nationalist politics during the 1920s.

Writing Mein Kampf

While imprisoned in Landsberg Prison, Hitler began writing Mein Kampf, published in 1925, which translates to “My Struggle.” Rudolf Hess helped organize Hitler’s ideas and prepare the manuscript. The book combined autobiography with political theory. Hitler discussed his childhood, his experiences during World War I, his hatred of communism, his nationalism, and his beliefs about race and power.

Historian R. C. K. Ensor explained that Hitler wrote the first part of the book while in prison “during a period of detention in a fortress to which Hitler was sentenced for his part in the Munich Putsch fiasco of November 1923.”¹ The prison sentence gave Hitler time to reflect on why the putsch had failed. He decided that the Nazi Party should no longer attempt to seize power violently. Instead, the party would gain influence legally through elections, propaganda, and mass political support.

Inside Mein Kampf, Hitler described how he believed propaganda should work on the public. He argued that political movements succeeded when they appealed to emotion instead of complex ideas. Hitler wrote that large groups of people responded more strongly to forceful and repeated messages than careful debate. These ideas later became central to Nazi propaganda during the 1930s.

The book also revealed how Hitler developed his racist and antisemitic beliefs while living in Vienna before World War I. In one section, Hitler described encountering Jewish communities in Vienna and claimed that his views changed over time. These passages later became some of the most infamous sections of the book because they helped shape Nazi racial ideology.

Hitler also focused heavily on nationalism and German identity. He believed Germany’s defeat in World War I had humiliated the country and argued that national unity and obedience were necessary for Germany to become powerful again. Much of the book attacked democracy, compromise, and political opposition. This strategic change became one of the most important results of Hitler’s imprisonment.

The Main Ideas Inside Mein Kampf and Nationalism

Although many people today know the title Mein Kampf, fewer understand what the book actually argued. Hitler presented several major ideas that later became central to Nazi Germany. One major theme was nationalism. Hitler argued that Germany had been humiliated after World War I and needed to become powerful again. He attacked the Treaty of Versailles constantly and promised national rebirth.
Many Germans connected with these ideas because they felt embarrassed by defeat and frustrated by economic hardship.

Racism and Antisemitism

Another major part of the book focused on race. Hitler falsely believed Germans belonged to a superior race and claimed Jewish people threatened Germany’s future. These hateful and false beliefs later became central to Nazi policy.

In Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote extensively about antisemitism and claimed that Jewish influence harmed German society. While living in Vienna, he claimed his opinions changed after observing Jewish communities and reading antisemitic political writings. These sections became extremely important later because they revealed ideas that eventually influenced Nazi racial laws and propaganda.
The racism inside Mein Kampf was not hidden or unclear. Hitler openly described these ideas years before becoming dictator.

Propaganda

Hitler also discussed propaganda in detail. He believed repeated messages could shape public opinion and influence the masses. He understood how newspapers, posters, speeches, and rallies could create emotional reactions.

The article by Ensor explains Hitler’s views by quoting him directly: “The mentality of the people at large is not sensitive to anything hesitant and weak.”² This quote helps explain Hitler’s belief that people respected strength more than compromise.

Leadership and Power

Hitler believed democracy was weak because it depended on debate and compromise. Instead, he argued that Germany needed one powerful leader who could unite the nation completely.
This idea later became known as the Führer principle, where total loyalty to one leader became central to Nazi ideology.

Why Mein Kampf Mattered During the 1920s

At first, many readers ignored Mein Kampf. The book was long, repetitive, and difficult to follow at times. Ensor even described it as “a hotch-potch of the most varied ingredients.”³ Still, the book became important because it clearly explained Hitler’s goals.

Ensor wrote, “Very few great men of action have ever disclosed beforehand so clearly as Adolf Hitler the principles and purposes that guide their acts.”⁴ This observation is important because Hitler openly described many of the ideas he later put into action.

The book mattered during the 1920s because Germany was unstable. Even after hyperinflation slowed down in the middle of the decade, many Germans still feared economic collapse and political violence. Democratic governments changed often, and confidence in the Weimar Republic remained weak. The Nazi Party used this instability to spread its message.

The Great Depression and the Growth of the Nazi Party

During the late 1920s, the Nazi Party was still relatively small compared to other political groups. However, everything changed after the American Great Depression began in 1929. Millions of Germans lost jobs. Businesses closed, banks failed, and poverty spread rapidly throughout Germany in the 1930’s. Once again, many citizens lost faith in democratic leaders.

Hitler and the Nazi Party used this crisis to attract more support. Their propaganda promised jobs, national pride, and strong leadership. The ideas first written in Mein Kampf suddenly reached a much larger audience. What had once seemed like a fringe political movement became a powerful national force.

The Significance

The story of the Beer Hall Putsch and Mein Kampf remains important because it shows how quickly democracy can weaken during times of crisis, similarly to today’s day in age.

Germany during the 1920s faced economic collapse, political violence, and public fear. Hitler used those conditions to spread extremist ideas and gain support.

The event also reminds people that dangerous political movements do not always begin with immediate success. Hitler’s coup failed, and he went to prison. Yet the failure gave him national attention and the opportunity to reshape his strategy.

Today, historians study these events carefully because they demonstrate the dangers of propaganda, political extremism, and public desperation.

Timeline of Events

1918 – Germany loses World War I.
1919 – Treaty of Versailles is signed.
1920 – German Workers’ Party becomes the Nazi Party.
1923 – Hyperinflation crisis spreads across Germany.
November 8–9, 1923 – Beer Hall Putsch takes place in Munich.
November 11, 1923 – Hitler is arrested for treason.
February 1924 – Hitler’s trial begins.
April 1924 – Hitler is sentenced to prison.
1924–1925 – Hitler writes Mein Kampf in Landsberg Prison.
1929 – Great Depression begins and Nazi support increases rapidly.

Map of Key Locations

Munich, Germany – Site of the Beer Hall Putsch.

Feldherrnhalle – Location where police stopped Hitler’s march.

Landsberg Prison – Prison where Hitler wrote Mein Kampf.

Berlin – Capital of the Weimar Republic.

Citations:

Ensor, R. C. K. “‘Mein Kampf’ and Europe.” International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1931-1939) 18, no. 4 (1939): 478–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/3019298.

General Research Division, The New York Public Library. “Mein Kampf.” New York Public Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 13, 2026. https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/192a4b10-c5b8-012f-2fd4-58d385a7bc34

The 1920s are known for their glamour and fast-paced cultural changes in the United States. When we think of the time, we imagine flappers, jazz clubs, booming cities, transportation, travel, and new technology. Yet beneath this surface of excitement and booming progress, the decade was also marked by social issues such as racial violence, corruption, and struggles over America’s growing wealth. One of the clearest examples of this dark reality was the Osage murders. This terror was found in a series of murders that targeted the Native American Osage Nation in Oklahoma between 1921 and 1926. These horrific mass killings were driven by nothing other than greed. These horrific acts revealed to the world just how the 1920s were not only a time of innovation and progress, but it was a time negatively impacted by racism, exploitation, and corruption. Understanding the circumstances surrounding the Osage Murders helps us see the decade in a more honest way by focusing on the tragedies as well as the successes. 

The Reign of Terror Began

On May 14, 1921, Minnie Smith, the sister of Mollie Burkhart, died of a peculiar illness. Only eight days later, on May 22, 1921, Anna Brown, another sister of Mollie, was murdered. Photo from the Oklahoman Collection at the Oklahoma 

Historical Society. Home | Oklahoma Historical Society 

This photo was used during the Hale Murder Trial.

The body of Anna Brown was found in a ravine with a gunshot wound to the back of the head. Only two months later, Anna and Mollie’s mother, Lizzie Q. Kyle, died in July 1921 after a long, mysterious illness. William Stepson, a 29-year-old Osage man, died in February 1922 of poisoning. While seeking help from the federal government, Barney McBride was stabbed to death in August 1922. Two other Osage members, Joe Greyhorse and Anna Sandford, were found murdered in January 1923. Only a month later, on February 6, 1923, Henry Roan was found shot to death from the rear of his car.  Family members of Mollie Burkhart, Rita Smith, Bill Smith, and Nettie Brookshire were killed in an explosion at their home on March 10, 1923. On June 14, 1923, Henry Grammer died in a car accident after his brakes were compromised.

Osage Tribal Headrights

To understand the reason for this reign of terror on the Native American Tribe, it is important to know how the Osage Nation became one of the wealthiest groups of people in the United States during the early 1920s. The Osage people had been forced from their native lands many times during the 1800s. Eventually, they made their way to open land in what is now known as Oklahoma. Unlike other tribes, the Osage people were forced to buy their reservation land, which gave them legal control over it. When a huge wealth of oil was discovered beneath their land in the early 1900s, the Osage tribe created a system of wealth giving each member a share of the profits from the oil. This share was called a “headright.” By the 1920s, these headrights were generating enormous amounts of money. Some Osage families earned hundreds of thousands of dollars every year. Newspapers at the time often described the Osage as “the richest people per capita in the world.” Their wealth allowed them to buy cars, hire servants, build large homes, and send their children to good schools. But this prosperity also attracted the attention of corrupt white settlers, businessmen, and criminals who believed that the Native Americans did not deserve wealth, and they were determined to take it for themselves.

1920s Racial Prejudice and Discrimination  

The Osage wealth existed in a decade shaped by racial prejudice and discrimination. Although the 1920s are sometimes portrayed as a new age modern era, it was also a time when the Ku Klux Klan grew, segregation remained, and many Americans believed in racist ideas about Native Americans, African Americans, immigrants, and other minority groups. These attitudes influenced how white society viewed the Osage. Many white residents of Oklahoma believed that the Native Americans would not be smart enough to manage their profits and that they needed white “guardians” to oversee their finances. Under federal law, many Osage adults were actually declared “incompetent” for the simple reason that they were Native American. This meant that white guardians had to be appointed to control their money. These guardians were often local businessmen, lawyers, or local ranchers. They frequently stole from the Osage, they overcharged them for goods and services, and they manipulated them into giving away property. This system created an environment where exploitation was easy and very common. It also set the stage for something even more evil: murder for profit.

William Hale and Ernest Burkhart

 At first, the deaths seemed isolated, but then one Osage woman, Anna Brown, was found fatally shot in the head and left in a ravine to die. Then a family member of hers was killed by poison. Shortly after that, more of her family members were murdered in their home. Over time, it became clear that these were not accidents or unrelated murders. These killings were part of a murder plot to wipe out an entire family line. There was a close connection to the victims who clearly benefited from the deaths, William Hale and his nephew, Ernest Burkhart. Hale was a very wealthy white rancher known as the “King of Osage Hills.”  One method used by Hale and his nephew was manipulation. They successfully manipulated several Osage women into marrying white men. This method allowed the white husbands to inherit the headrights after the death of their wives. Other victims were targeted because they were next in line to inherit wealth from relatives who had already been killed. Once the family line was taken out, the plot began to reveal itself, and the motive was clear. The local law enforcement did not come to help the Osage people because most of them were somehow connected to the same white businessmen who were benefiting from the murders. It was later discovered that some of the local law enforcement and officials were bribed to look the other way, while others simply did not care about crimes committed against Native American people. This action allowed the killings to continue unsolved for many years.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation

The failure of local authorities eventually forced the Osage Nation to seek help from the federal government. In 1923, they traveled to Washington, D.C., and demanded an investigation. Their request reached the newly formed FBI. At the time, the FBI was small and its new director, J. Edgar Hoover, saw this case as an opportunity to show the country just how effective the new FBI could be. In an effort to solve his first official investigation, J. Edgar Hoover assigned a former Texas Ranger, Tom White, to lead this investigation. White and his team used undercover agents, conducted interviews, and applied forensic techniques to uncover the truth. Once all information was collected, Hale’s elaborate plot was revealed. It was Hale’s nephew, Ernest Burkhart, who married the Osage woman named Mollie Kyle.  Shortly after their marriage, the members of Mollie’s family were murdered one by one. This allowed Burkhart and Hale to inherit the victim’s valuable headrights. In 1926, Hale, Burkhart, and several accomplices were arrested and eventually convicted. Their trials exposed the corruption and racism that had allowed the murders to continue for so long. Although the convictions brought some justice, many other murders remained unsolved.

The Climate of the 1920s

The 1920s brought economic expansion, a new excitement for transportation, and the development of a consumer culture. This created new opportunities for wealth across America. These new opportunities brought about a new enemy: greed and corruption. The driving force of the Osage Reign of Terror was profit and greed. The lives of the Osage people were simply obstacles for the corrupt murderers. This greed and corruption also brought about financial schemes and unethical business practices, which later became increasingly common. Another defining feature of the 1920s was the overwhelming racial discrimination. This allowed the Osage to be targeted specifically because they were Native Americans. Many white Americans believed they had the right to control the Native American land and resources. This right led to the creation of a guardianship system where Native American adults were treated like children who were not to be trusted with their own money. This system reflected the racist beliefs of a decade full of cultural conflict. In the 1920s, common traditional values conflicted with new ideas about gender, race, science, and modern life. The attack on the Osage people occurred in a region where many white settlers believed in those traditional, old‑fashioned racial hierarchies and resisted the idea of Native people having wealth or independence. Their violent response to Osage prosperity and growth reflected the cultural conflict and the tensions of a time when many traditional Americans struggled to adapt to a rapidly changing society. The 1920s also saw widespread corruption in government and law enforcement. Prohibition, for example, led to the rise of organized crime and bribery of police officers. In the Osage case, it was reported that many local officials ignored or covered up murders because they knew or were connected to the criminals responsible. This failure of justice was not unusual for the decade. It shows just how easily local powerful individuals could manipulate the system for their own benefit. This local corruption highlights the need for the involvement of the federal government. The Bureau of Investigation’s involvement marked one of the first major cases in which the federal government stepped in to solve crimes that local authorities could not—or would not—handle. This shift reflected a broader trend in the decade, as the federal government began taking on more responsibility for regulating business, enforcing laws, and protecting citizens.

The Trauma and the aftermath

While the Osage murders reveal important historical themes, it is essential to remember that they were also a human tragedy. Dozens of men, women, and children were killed. Families were destroyed and wiped out. Survivors lived in fear, and many suffered long‑term trauma. This trauma is still felt in the Osage community today. The story of Mollie Burkhart is especially heartbreaking because she lost her sister, her mother, and other relatives in such a short period of time. She later discovered that her own husband had been responsible for the plot to kill her family members when he confessed. Her experience symbolizes the betrayal and suffering that many of her people endured. It is not just a story about the past because it raises many important questions that are relevant today. How do racism and prejudice shape who has access to wealth and power? How can legal systems fail to protect vulnerable communities? What happens when greed becomes more important than human life? All of these questions must be answered honestly. 

Justice and the Future

In recent years, the Osage Reign of Terror has received renewed attention through books, documentaries, and films. This renewed interest has helped bring the story into public awareness and has encouraged more people to learn about Native American history. It has also sparked conversations about justice, historical memory, and the need to acknowledge the darker parts of American history. These darker parts reveal a side of the 1920s that is often overlooked. The side that is marked by racism, corruption, and violence. While the 1920s are frequently remembered as a time of progress and excitement, this story reminds us that not everyone shared in the decade’s prosperity. For the Osage Nation, the 1920s were a time of fear, loss, and betrayal. This shows us how economic growth could coexist with exploitation, how modern institutions could fail to protect people, and how racism could shape the lives of entire communities. Most importantly, we honor the memory of the Osage victims by acknowledging their story and recognizing its significance in American history.

Bibliography

Grann, David. Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI. New York: Doubleday, 2017

Osage murders case | Federal Bureau of Investigation, n.d.

“The FBI’s First Big Case: The Osage Murders.” History.com, May 28, 2025. https://www.history.com/articles/the-fbis-first-big-case-the-osage-murders.

February 29, 1929

Planning and Funding the Construction of Mount Rushmore

The construction of Mount Rushmore is one of the most ambitious public art projects in United States history. The massive undertaking required a mix of artistic vision, political lobbying, and persistent fundraising efforts. The monument today is an iconic symbol of American nationalism carved into the granite of South Dakota’s Black Hills. This significance drove the hearts and minds of those involved in the project to keep pushing forward despite many obstacles. The planning and funding of Mount Rushmore is a story of local ambition, federal intervention, economic hardship, and the complex conflict between art and politics in the 1920s. The idea for Mount Rushmore was developed by South Dakota’s state historian, Doane Robinson. In 1923, Robinson wanted to bring tourists to the State so that they could experience the natural beauty. South Dakota was not a popular destination in the American West, so Robinson was determined to make a change. His initial thoughts on the project were to have western heroes like Lewis and Clark or Buffalo Bill carved into the mountains. He contacted the famous sculptor Gutzon Borglum to begin the project. When Borglum visited the Black Hills, he became inspired to expand Robinson’s ideas and create a national monument. Borglum felt that the expression of American patriotism would bring about broader support and ultimately federal funding. 

The Artist

Gutzon Borglum chose Mount Rushmore, a 6,000 foot high mountain, because it had great natural lighting and a 300 foot high area for carving. Initially, he had planned to carve local historical figures representing the great history of South Dakota in an effort to bring tourism and travel to the area. He later decided to expand this project to a national significance. This was to become a celebration of our country and its national history. This nationalist project came about at a time after World War I, when there was a very narrow view of what it meant to be American. Also, there was a growing intolerance of foreigners, and the evils of racial discrimination were experienced across the country. It was common for white Protestant men to show hostility toward all marginalized groups, which included Asians, African Americans, Catholics, and Jews. In 1924, Congress passed the National Origins Act, limiting the immigration of certain groups of people. The Act included a provision stopping the immigration of all Asians. The rise of the Ku Klux Klan during this time was also no surprise. This climate explains the challenges Borglum experienced when he decided to construct the monument on land that was sacred to the Lakota Indians. The customs and beliefs of the Lakota Indians were bypassed, and the land was ultimately taken from them. Borglum pushed ahead with his plans and ultimately dedicated the rest of his life to this project. 

The Significance 

In his planning of the monument, Borglum called Mount Rushmore a tribute to “the spirit of a people’s Government.” This phrase showed his belief that the monument reflected the values of the Progressive movement, which Borglum viewed as distinctly American. He believed that the monument symbolized America’s achievements, particularly those connected to the expansion of the national domain. He included figures like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt because they represent the story of American history. He saw this monument as a picture of American values and accomplishments and compared its significance to the Pyramids of ancient Egypt. 

Funding the Project

Funding the project proved impossible from the start. Borglum initially promised that private donors would contribute heavily, but these donors never provided enough funds for the massive project. Early fundraising efforts in South Dakota also fell short. In an effort to fund the massive project, the South Dakota legislature was approached. Initially, the legislature refused to provide any public funds, so private investors were sought out. This was a problem because the funds needed for the project were great and significant. The cost estimates were somewhere between $400,000 and $800,000. It was extremely difficult to raise such an astronomical amount of money, leading to serious financial roadblocks. These roadblocks threatened to end the project before it even began. Borglum however, was hopeful and continued to hold ceremonies and give speeches where he invited many political leaders to attend. These efforts would attract support and hopefully donors, but the donations were too small to get the project up and running. Borglum realized that the only way to fix this problem was to seek out federal funding. A turning point came about when President Calvin Coolidge was on vacation in the Black Hills in 1927. This was the opportunity Borglum needed to secure federal support, and he was not going to pass up the chance. The President was invited to attend the project’s dedication ceremony and see the significance of the planned project for himself. At this ceremony, the President publicly endorsed the project and promised federal funding. At a later date, the Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon agreed with the President and backed the federal funding bill. This was a win for Borglum and South Dakota Senator Norbeck as they were now able to drive the project forward. The support of the Federal Government was necessary and the only thing that would allow this project to continue. President Calvin Coolidge believed in the project and promised federal funding to support its completion.

.

The Mount Rushmore National Memorial Act

The Act authorized the U.S. government to provide funds up to $250,000. It also created a commission of 12 members to be appointed by the President of the United States. This commission would oversee the projects, planning, and construction. Although South Dakota had already passed legislation authorizing the carving of a national memorial in the Harney National Forest, the federal Act provided the legal and financial authority necessary for a project of national scale. The earlier state bill had authorized the Mount Harney Memorial Association to select the site, design, and name of the memorial, but it lacked the resources to complete a project of this scale. In February of 1929, the President continued his support when he signed the bill establishing the Mount Rushmore National Memorial Commission and allocated $250,000 toward its completion. At the end of Coolidge’s presidency, President Herbert Hoover took over the organization of the commission. The support of the President and Congress for the Rushmore bill displays the progression and optimism of the 1920s. This was a time when prosperity and expansion were very possible. Even after the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression, the project remained a priority as it created many jobs for workers who would have otherwise been unemployed. The Mount Rushmore National Memorial Act transformed the project from a statewide tourist attraction to a national project displaying national American pride. The efforts of Gutzon Borglum and the South Dakota State Senator Norbeck secured the support of the Treasury Secretary and President Coolidge. 

Timeline of Events

To fully understand how Mount Rushmore grew from a local idea to bring about tourism to a national monument supported by the federal government, it is useful to show this massive development through a chronological timeline. The table below highlights the major milestones in planning, funding, political support, and construction.

The 1920s

The planning and funding of Mount Rushmore reveal a complex story of local ambition, federal intervention, economic hardship, and the merging of art, politics, and the cultural climate of the 1920s. The 20s was a decade where the conflicts and cultural climate shaped the path of this project. The original idea for Mount Rushmore came about during the Roaring Twenties, a time in history when economic expansion, mass consumer culture, and a national fascination with all things modern were booming. The 1920s were also a period when states and cities across the country sought to attract tourists, investment, and national attention. South Dakota was no exception. The 1920s also brought about a feeling of American patriotism because in the aftermath of World War I, the interest in national identity was intense. Americans everywhere idolized the Founding Fathers, and past presidents were huge symbols of patriotism and national unity. Borglum’s choice to depict Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt fit right in with the cultural moment of the 20s. The political landscape of the 1920s also shaped the project’s early development because the Republican administrations during this time supported business enterprise and national pride. The decade was dominated by Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover, all known for their support of limited federal intervention, tourism, and the celebration of American ideals and patriotic display. These priorities were seen in Borglum’s vision of a monument celebrating American greatness. During the 1920s, states often began ambitious projects celebrating the country on a national scale. Rural states like South Dakota did not benefit much from the economic boom, which made tourism development even more of a priority. The development of Mount Rushmore came at a time when there was an agricultural depression that hit the Midwest just years before the 1929 crash. 

Construction

Borglum’s original artistic vision was a moment of presidential torsos, inscriptions, and an elaborate “Hall of Records” behind the monument. Funding limitations quickly downgraded his plans to a less ambitious design. The construction of the monument was extremely dangerous and technically difficult. The work crews used dynamite, jackhammers, and hand tools to carve away nearly 450,000 tons of rock. With all of the danger and dynamite, it was truly shocking that not one worker died during the construction. The funding problems stopped the construction at times, and Borglum himself spent a lot of his time lobbying Congress and pushing for funding so that he could return to supervising the carving. 

Conclusion

The planning and funding of Mount Rushmore reveal a story far more complex than the noble faces carved into the mountain display. What began as a struggle to bring about state tourism developed into a federally supported national monument. The merging of artistic ambition, political strategy, and relentless advocacy was necessary to complete the project. The monument’s completion required an extreme amount of navigation through legislative hurdles, financial shortfalls, and adapting the grand artistic visions to the reality of resources available. Mount Rushmore today stands not only as a symbol of American presidents but also honors the collaborative effort at a time when nationalism was important to Americans. Its history shows us how monuments are shaped by politics and the economy just as much as they are shaped by the tools of a talented sculptor.

Bibliography

Biome, Albert. “Patriarchy Fixed in Stone: Gutzon Borglum’s ‘Mount Rushmore.’” 

American Art 5, no. 1/2 (1991): 143–67. 

Fite, Gilbert C. “Gutzon Borglum Mercurial Master of Colossal Art.” Montana: The 

Magazine of Western History 25, no. 2 (1975): 2–19. 

Glass, Matthew. “Producing Patriotic Inspiration at Mount Rushmore.” Journal of the 

American Academy of Religion 62, no. 2 (1994): 265–83. 

Rood, John. Review of Giants in Stone, by Gilbert C. Fite. Minnesota History 33, no. 2 

(1952): 86–87. 

Rumble, Walker. “Gutzon Borglum: Mount Rushmore and the American Tradition.” The 

Pacific Northwest Quarterly 59, no. 3 (1968): 121–27. 

• Featured Image: August 10, 1927 Mount Rushmore dedication ceremony where President Coolidge promised funding for the project. Memorial History – Mount Rushmore National Memorial (U.S. National Park Service)

An interesting method of considering the historiography of the 1920s is to consider how history was taught to students throughout the decades. Comparing and contrasting two textbook chapters from two very different periods of time brought to life the focus and themes of 1920s historiography. The 2005 textbook chapter, “The Roaring Life of the 1920s,” and the 1977 textbook chapter, “From Prosperity to Economic Collapse, 1920–1932,” certainly reflect very distinct historiographical traditions, emphasizing the themes and beliefs of the time. In Jennifer Fronc’s article, “The 1920s: A Historiographical Survey,” the author clearly details the 1920s themes to consider. Knowing when these textbooks were written truly assists us in evaluating why each chapter emphasizes certain themes and omits others. Together, the chapters illustrate both the evolution of historical interpretation and the limitations of textbook narratives shaped by the priorities of their decade.

In Fronc’s article, the author notes that the 1920s themes that dominated the 1930s through the mid-20^th century focus heavily on political leadership, economic policy, and the origins of the Great Depression. This older tradition framed the decade as a prelude to economic disaster, emphasizing Republican governance, laissez‑faire ideology, and structural weaknesses in the economy.[1] The 1977 textbook chapter fits neatly within this framework. It centers on presidential administrations, tariffs, budget policy, labor unrest, and the eventual collapse of prosperity. The chapter’s attention to Harding’s scandals, Coolidge’s conservatism, and Hoover’s economic challenges mirrors the political‑economic emphasis of mid‑century historians who viewed the 1920s primarily through the lens of governance and economic instability. Its publication date clearly matters because it was written before the development of cultural history, which was experienced more in the 1980s and 1990s. The textbook chapter reflects 1970s priorities as a period where political and economic themes still dominated history education.

By contrast, the 2005 textbook chapter takes a very different approach. It teaches the history of the 1920s through a social and cultural lens. As Fronc explains in her article, this new perspective shifts the focus away from presidents and policies and toward urbanization, gender, sexuality, race, consumer culture, and modern ideas. The 2005 chapter highlights flappers, Prohibition, the Scopes Trial, the Harlem Renaissance, and mass entertainment, illustrating this new cultural-history approach. This approach considers the cultural identity of the time rather than merely focusing on an economic boom before its collapse.  By 2005 in America, cultural history had become the dominant mode of interpreting the 1920s. Textbooks during the early 2000s increased their content of issues like gender, race, popular culture, and everyday life.

Throughout the decades, textbook treatment of the 1920s failed to show the complexity of the decade as we understand it today. In her article, Jennifer Fronc describes the treatment of the 1920s as a “dual historiographical tradition.” The older tradition of a political/economic narrative and the newer tradition of a social/cultural narrative.[2] The 1977 chapter discusses the Red Scare and the Palmer Raids, framing them as political overreach rather than part of a broader history of state repression and the expansion of federal policing power.[3] Similarly, the 2005 chapter celebrates the Harlem Renaissance, but does not discuss the deeper issues of housing segregation, racialized policing, or economic exclusion.[4]  Today’s textbooks present the 1920s as a complex decade of conflict and growth from many different cultural perspectives. This method has grown from the older traditions of the 1970s and early 2000s.

[1] Fronc, Jennifer. “The 1920s—A Historiographical Survey,” in The Routledge History of the United States, ed., Routledge, 2018.

[2] Fronc, Jennifer. “The 1920s—A Historiographical Survey,”

[3] “Chapter 33: From Prosperity to Economic Collapse, 1920-1932” in Rise of the American Nation by Todd, Lewis Paul, 544-588. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977.

[4] “Chapter 21: Roaring Life of the 1920s” in The Americans: History of the United States by Kennedy, David M. 638-667. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2005.

When thinking of toys that have tested the fate of time, none are as prevalent as the yo-yo. It’s a simple toy that is two disks tied together with a string that people can perform increasingly difficult tricks with. The average person in the 21st century is aware of Duncan Toys Company and the various yo-yos they sell, but they don’t know who brought the modern concept to the United States.

What many people don’t realize is that the story of the first commercialized yo-yos is one of immigrant success during a time of hatred and nationalism. Despite the surplus of anti-Filipino riots throughout the United States and the eventual stock market crash, Pedro Flores created a product that lasted long after his death, and his name and story deserve to be acknowledged by the public sphere.

The Creator

Pedro Flores was born in 1896 in Vintar, a municipality in the Philippines. It’s very likely he did not have the best childhood growing up, as his home country was transitioning through a period of war and turmoil. They had been part of the Spanish–American War, with a naval battle happening in Manila bay, and many Filipinos fighting alongside the Americans.

When they were free from the chains of Spanish rule, the United States annexed them, and they soon found themselves in the Philippines-American War after revolting against their new colonial power, until the Philippines surrendered in 1901.

What he did gain from everything, despite his rough childhood, was the precursor to the modern yo-yo.

In 1915, at around 19 years old, Flores moved from the Philippines to the United States, landing himself in California in order to pursue an education at San Francisco’s High School of Commerce.¹ Afterwards, he studied law at the University of California’s law school, but dropped out and moved to Santa Barbra, working odd jobs in order to survive.²

While working as a bellboy, he decided to “[demonstrate] a toy that he had carved out of wood during his lunch break.”³ After reading of a man who made money off of a rubber ball attached to a string, he thought back to the yo-yo and figured it had market potential, stating “I do not expect to make a million dollars, I just want to be working for myself. I have been working for other people for practically all my life and I don’t like it.”⁴

From there, he set his pursuits on starting up a yo-yo company. He had no luck asking for assistance from wealthy Filipino countrymen, so Flores focused on receiving a certificate to conduct business, which he received on June 9th 1928. From there, he started the Yo-Yo Manufacturing Company in Santa Barbara, California.⁵

The Production

Although its modern iteration comes from Pedro Flores, the idea of the yo-yo has been around for centuries in Ancient Greece and China, showing up in pots and paintings respectively.⁶ In the 18th century, it was a popular toy among aristocrats and, in English, was referred to as a “bandalore” or “quiz.”⁷⁸ A popular theory states the yo-yo was used as a weapon in the Philippines, but there is no evidence to back up this claim.

Additionally, many people incorrectly claim that “yo-yo” is a word from Tagalog that translates to “come-come” or “to return” in English. In Tagalog, the word does not exist. “Halika dito” (come here) and “bumalik” (with a person, to return) are actual words in Tagalog, but not “yo-yo.”

Another theory is that the word comes from Ilocano, but I am not familiar enough with the language, nor do I know anyone who can speak it. This makes the question of where the word “yo-yo” comes from unanswered, but the simplest answer could be that Flores came up with something catchy that would help the toy sell. Unfortunately, no one can know for sure.

After the creation of the Yo-Yo Manufacturing Company, Flores created a dozen yo-yos that he sold to the neighboring children on June 23, 1928.⁹ Some quick math reveals that each yo-yo likely took a day to create. By November of that same year, 2,000 yo-yos were produced. This attracted financiers James Lewis and Daniel Stone, who helped him create a new company in Los Angeles that had machines.[] He finally didn’t have to carve yo-yos by hand. By November 1929, he also had Flores Yo-Yo Corporation in Hollywood, and was producing 300,000 yo-yos daily.

What helped propel the yo-yo’s popularity was the yo-yo contests held. The first contests happened in 1928, and were hosted by Pedro Flores himself in Santa Barbara. These original contests were a test to see “who could make the yo-yo go up and down the most times without stopping.”¹⁰

There were also contests to see “who could throw their yo-yo the farthest with a complete return to the hand, and who could perform the most perfect spins in five minutes.”¹¹ These fun tricks one could do with a yo-yo attracted the attention of various people, going as far out as interesting Donald F. Duncan, the man behind Duncan Toys Company.

After the success of the yo-yo, Flores sold the product to Duncan in 1930 for around $25,000 to $250,000—though many agree the price to be on the lower end of the spectrum.¹² He is quoted with saying “I am more interested in teaching children to use the yo-yos than I am in manufacturing of yo-yos,” and did promote the toy for Duncan after the fact.¹³ Flores continued to attach himself to the yo-yo, helping people such as Joe Radovan sell the Chico Yo-yo, and even started Flores Corp. of America in 1954, where he temporarily produced more of the toy.¹⁴ Unfortunately, many of these companies are gone, and Flores eventually passed in 1964, but Duncan still sells yo-yos of varying skill levels to this day.

Significance

Immigration and Racism

Pedro Flores was an immigrant from the Philippines. He isn’t unlike other immigrants who came to the United States; he likely traveled across the Pacific Ocean to seek a better life outside the Philippines. However, as a Filipino immigrant, his experience is more unique from other immigrants.

After the Spanish-American War and the Philippine-American War, the United States controlled the Philippines behind the scenes. This included Filipino education, where they taught the new generation English, and that all men are created equal. As a result, Filipinos did not see themselves as aliens when they immigrated to the United States and “existed, rather, in a midway zone between Filipino and American identity.”¹⁵

Filipino immigrants were also unaffected by the Immigration Act of 1917, which imposed literacy tests on Asian immigrants. This is likely due to the Philippines being controlled by the United States.

Numbers rose as more Filipinos immigrated to the United States, with a large population of them settling in California—it is the closest state to the Philippines, after all. However, as immigration rose throughout the United States, the Ku Klux Klan rose to fight for nativism. They were one of many groups to lobby for restrictions on immigration.¹⁶ Additionally, despite their focus being against black Americans and Catholics, they also targeted immigrants, such as Filipinos. The KKK stirred much anti-Asian sentiment within America, causing anti-Filipino riots to occur in America.

For example, in 1927, one of the biggest anti-Filipino riots happened in Yakima Valley, Washington. A mob of white people was demanding that Filipino farmworkers be driven out from the valley, believing that “since the Filipinos were brown-skinned and Asian, they should not be permitted to approach white women or compete with white men for jobs.”¹⁷ This is, obviously, not true and only serves to objectify Filipinos, but people believed it at the time, and these mobs eventually chased them out after threatening their deaths. The perpetrators were arrested, but only received ten days of jail time.

Something similar happened in Wenatchee Valley, Washington in 1928 and 1929, where Filipinos were chased out of the valley.¹⁸ What happened at these riots, and many other anti-Filipino riots throughout the decade, is disgusting. This isn’t even the worst of what I found, as more violent acts have been committed in different riots, but the fact that white people were willing to chase these Filipinos down because they looked different is a testament to the hatred of the decade, even with the pluralism of the time.

Despite this anti-Filipino sentiment along the West Coast, Pedro Flores still made a name for himself. This is an amazing accomplishment that should be celebrated alongside other famous figures of the decade. He made a noteworthy contribution to culture then and now, and his name deserves recognition as well.

Reflection of Culture

When reflecting upon consumer culture, the creation of the modern yo-yo for American audiences is an interesting case. Especially when compared to objects like the Form Model T.

Pedro Flores created a product based on the culture he knew, and managed to sell it through demonstration. According to Lynn Dumenil, blue-collar workers helped shape consumer culture, while white-collar workers were more susceptible to consumer culture through things such as advertising.¹⁹²⁰

As stated before with Filipino immigrants being the midway point of their Filipino and American identities, Flores’s yo-yos exist as him contributing his culture, that being a toy from the Philippines, while also successfully advertising it to the public.

The Modern Temper specifically discusses how advertisements in the 1920s utilized “the personal approach, the tendency to include “you” in the text.”²¹ He managed to encapsulate this perfectly with his yo-yo competitions. If a person wished to participate, they needed a yo-yo, and Flores Yo-yos were the only yo-yos available for a while. These competitions eventually spread outside Santa Barbara and outside California, furthering his product’s reach, and getting more people to buy his yo-yo.

On top of that, yo-yos were relatively cheap to make, meaning they could easily be produced and sold to the public. Even when the Great Depression hit, “[inexpensive] toys with high play value, such as the yo-yo and the Radio Flyer Wagon, were very lucrative investments. Whereas other American entrepreneurs lost fortunes, toy inventors such as Pedro Flores and Antonio Pasin acquired millions.”²² The yo-yo surviving the Great Depression is an incredible feat, but it’s thanks to the fact that it’s simply two wooden disks, a wooden axel, and a piece of string. Anyone could hypothetically create a yo-yo if they had the skill and patience.

What this meant for the 20s (and beyond?)

Ever since, the yo-yo has been a popular toy among children. In the late 90s, Yomega partnered with Bandai, causing a bunch of advertising of the yo-yo to spread like wildfire and reignite the craze for the toy.²³

The toy became so popular that National Yo-yo Day is celebrated on June 6th to commemorate Donald F. Duncan. While this is an amazing achievement for a toy to have, what about the man who brought the toy to the United States?

I’m not suggesting we change National Yo-yo Day to be on Pedro Flores’ birthday, but it is a shame that Duncan is celebrated before Flores.

The story behind the modern yo-yo is a story of Filipino success that should be celebrated. Considering the toy’s 100th year anniversary is coming up as of writing this blog post, Duncan Toys Company should commemorate the toy’s origin by retelling Pedro Flores’ story. That way, his name isn’t just a footnote in the toy’s history, as he had a huge role in bringing the toy over from the Philippines.

They also used to have a history page back in the early 2000s that mentioned Pedro Flores, but have since removed it as the years have gone by and website standards change. I personally believe they should bring their history page back, so that people curious about the origin of the yo-yo have a starting point and understand that Duncan shouldn’t be taking all the credit from Flores.

After all, to quote Lucky’s Collectors Guide to 20th Century Yo-yos: History and Values, “Although Duncan is now the name most frequently associated with the popularity of the yo-yo, Pedro Flores fueled the original yo-yo fire.”²⁴

Citations

Footnotes

1. Naomi Hirahara, Distinguished Asian American Business Leaders (Bloomsbury Academic, 2003), 57. ︎
2. Hirahara, 57. ︎
3. Hirahara, 57. ︎
4. Lucky J. Meisenheimer, Lucky’s Collectors Guide to 20th Century Yo-Yos (Lucky J’s Swim & Surf, 1998), 99. ︎
5. Meisenheimer, 99. ︎
6. Mark Fischetti, “String Theory,” Scientific American 291, no. 3 (2004): 110. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26060692. ︎
7. Fischetti, 110. ︎
8. Meisenheimer, 34. ︎
9. Meisenheimer, 99. ︎
10. Meisenheimer, 36. ︎
11. Meisenheimer, 100. ︎
12. Meisenheimer, 61. ︎
13. Meisenheimer, 100 ︎
14. Meisenheimer, 100. ︎
15. Kevin Starr, Golden Dreams (Oxford University Press, 2011), 450. ︎
16. Lynn Dumenil, The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s (New York, Ny: Hill and Wang, 2007), 207. ︎
17. Steve Ross, “Ninety Years Ago in Washington, a Wave of Anti-Immigrant Sentiment Resulted in Horror for Filipinos,” Slate Magazine (Slate, August 4, 2017). https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/ninety-years-ago-in-washington-a-wave-of-anti-immigrant-sentiment-resulted-in-horror-for-filipinos.html?pay=1778139475174. ︎
18. Ross. ︎
19. Dumenil, 82. ︎
20. Dumenil, 86. ︎
21. Dumenil, 90. ︎
22. Sharon M. Scott, Toys and American Culture: An Encyclopedia (ABC-CLIO, 2009), xxiv. ︎
23. Dr. Yo-Yo’s Emporium of Wonderful Things, “AYYA: 10 Years and Throwing – the Unreleased Documentary,” YouTube, November 4, 2012, 30:36. https://youtu.be/EeYhGP92ESI?si=ufsyMmG1iAuFIyvR. ︎
24. Meisenheimer, 100. ︎

Bibliography

Dr. Yo-Yo’s Emporium of Wonderful Things. “AYYA: 10 Years and Throwing – the Unreleased Documentary.” YouTube, November 4, 2012. https://youtu.be/EeYhGP92ESI?si=ufsyMmG1iAuFIyvR.

Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York, Ny: Hill and Wang, 2007.

Fischetti, Mark. “String Theory.” Scientific American 291, no. 3 (2004): 110–11. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26060692.

Hirahara, Naomi. Distinguished Asian American Business Leaders. Bloomsbury Academic, 2003.

Meisenheimer, Lucky J. Lucky’s Collectors Guide to 20th Century Yo-Yos. Lucky J’s Swim & Surf, 1998.

Ross, Steve. “Ninety Years Ago in Washington, a Wave of Anti-Immigrant Sentiment Resulted in Horror for Filipinos.” Slate Magazine. Slate, August 4, 2017. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/08/ninety-years-ago-in-washington-a-wave-of-anti-immigrant-sentiment-resulted-in-horror-for-filipinos.html?pay=1778139475174.

Scott, Sharon M. Toys and American Culture: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO, 2009.

Starr, Kevin. Golden Dreams. Oxford University Press, 2011.

The 1925 Tri-State Tornado outbreak lasted from March 17-18 1925, and it is one of the deadliest tornado outbreaks in recorded history. It was given its name because it traveled across three different states, that being Missouri, Illinois, and Indiana. The distance being 219-mile-long (352 km). The reason why it’s considered to be the deadliest tornado is because at least 751 men, women, and children died and 2,2298 were injured. While we can consider the Tri-State Tornado to be a natural disaster, to fully understand this catastrophic event, we should place it in the broader context of the 1920s. The 1920s was a decade that’s often associated with economic growth, flappers, the jazz era, technological advances, and lots of cultural change. The tornado revealed a lot of strengths and weaknesses of what society was like during the twenties, rapidly modernizing but still very vulnerable to natural disasters. 

The 1920s: A Time of Unpredictability

The 1920s, also known as the “Roaring Twenties,” was a time of significant economic expansion, especially in urban areas. New technologies such as automobiles, radios, and telephones changed the way people lived their everyday lives. Lynn Dumenil, who wrote the book The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s, describes the decade as a time when Americans embraced “speed, efficiency, and innovation” in ways that significantly transformed both work and leisure.¹ However, the progress in some areas was not the same as the progress in other areas. Rural communities, especially in the Midwest and South, often fell behind cities in infrastructure, communication, and access to emergency services. This uneven development is very important when understanding the devastation of the Tri-State Tornado. While cities were becoming more modern, there were a lot of smaller towns that still relied on older systems of communication. Weather forecasting in 1925 was also very limited. The U.S. National Weather Service did not issue tornado warnings at the time, partly because officials feared causing panic. As a result, lots of different towns and communities in the tornado’s path had little to no warning before the storm struck. Additionally, the cultural atmosphere of the 1920s focused more on modernization and human experience rather than nature. Scientific progress and industrial growth gave many Americans confidence that technology could solve most problems. Yet, disasters such as the Tri-State Tornado challenged this belief. As Lynn Dumneil said, modernity created both optimism and anxiety, as Americans confronted forces they could not fully control in the 1920s.² The tornado showed everyone in the midwest that nature is still just as powerful and unpredictable despite the technological advancements we make.

The Tornado and its Path

The Tri-State Tornado began in southeastern Missouri and moved through southern Illinois and into southwestern Indiana. It traveled at speeds estimated to exceed 60 miles per hour. This gave residents absolutely zero time to prepare for the tornado.³ Entire towns were destroyed within minutes, whether or not people were ready. One of the towns that was hit pretty hard by the tornado was Murphysboro, Illinois, where over 200 people were tragically killed. Contemporary newspaper accounts described scenes of total devastation. In the article “The Murphysboro Tornado” by W.O. Blanchard states “The description of the tornado’s approach by eye-witnesses varied with the position of the observer, the time of the observation and his mental state at the time. The rapid approach of such a huge death-dealing phenomenon provides conditions hardly conducive to calm and careful observation.”⁴ Many newspapers and primary accounts highlight the suddenness and intensity of the disaster. Eyewitnesses often struggled to describe what they saw due to how traumatic the event was. Statements from many survivors include: “A tornado is a unique kind of horror, with the ability to conjure up apocalyptic and downright bizarre scenes. Your house might be flattened, whilst your neighbor’s is untouched. The person you’re sitting next to might die, and you live.” and “From the time you realize a tornado is going to hit, you’re living with the absolute certainty that every second might be your last. When the outer bands reach you, you’re in almost complete darkness and your house is being soaked in torrential rain and hammered with debris. And when it strikes with a defining roar, there’s nothing to do but hold on and wait, and hope you come out alive.”⁵ What the people saw reflected the terrifying and unfamiliar nature of tornadoes for many people at the time, especially given the limited time noticed before the disaster struck. 

News Coverage and Reactions

Newspaper articles from 1925 provide insight into how people experienced and understood the disaster. Newspapers across the country very quickly started to report on the destruction, often emphasizing the scale of the tragedy. Eyewitness News had this to say about the event “In total, 695 people lost their lives. The town of Griffin, among others, was destroyed but rebuilt. A Main Street building is believed to have survived the tornado. The school, destroyed, but later rebuilt as well. What’s left of that school still stands today, along with memories of the town’s resilient spirit,”⁶ the high death toll, countless injuries, and widespread damage were proof of how deadly and traumatizing the tornado was. Relief efforts also reveal a lot of information about this era. Organizations such as the American Red Cross played a huge role in providing aid for those affected. After the tornado, the Tri-State region demonstrated remarkable strength and compassion. Survivors, victims’ families, and affected communities showed resilience as they endured, grieved, and began to rebuild. Rescue workers and neighboring communities provided essential food, temporary housing, and medicine to support recovery efforts.⁷ There were also lots of volunteers who distributed food, clothing, and medical supplies, showing the importance of national relief organizations in times of crisis. Local governments, churches, and civic groups also participated in relief efforts. In many cases, communities relied heavily on volunteer labor rather than formal emergency systems. This reliance reflects the limited role of the federal government in disaster response during the 1920s. Unlike today, there was no centralized agency equivalent to modern emergency management organizations. Personal letters and survivor testimonies further illustrate the impact the disaster had on those living in the area. Many accounts describe families searching for missing relatives or attempting to rebuild their homes with limited resources. These sources remind us that beyond the statistics, the tornado caused profound personal loss.

Has Modernity Caused Problems in the Long Run?

The Tri-State Tornado also shows us how much people contradicted themselves in the twenties. On one hand, the decade was characterized by technological progress and optimism. On the other hand, the disaster exposed the limits of that progress. As Dumenil explains, modernity in the 1920s often created “a sense of both excitement and unease,” as Americans navigated rapid change.⁸ The Tri-State Tornado tells us what Dumenil meant by “a sense of unease”. For example, while railroads and telegraphs allowed news of the disaster to spread quickly, it didn’t help with preventing the disaster from happening. Similarly, advances in engineering had not yet led to tornado-resistant buildings. Many structures in the affected areas were poorly constructed and unable to withstand extreme winds. Another important factor was the absence of a coordinated national response. The federal government in the 1920s generally followed a policy of limited intervention in local affairs. As a result, disaster relief depended heavily on private organizations and state governments. This approach often led to uneven recovery efforts, with some communities receiving more assistance than others.

Social and Economic Impact

The economic impact the Tornado had on the midwest was severe, especially in smaller towns that relied heavily on agriculture and local businesses. Unfortunately, crops were destroyed, livestock killed, and infrastructures were damaged. In many cases, local towns and communities were going to be struggling for years. We can highlight areas where the economic hardships are most notable through the broader prosperity of the 1920s. During this time, America was split in two; some Americans enjoyed rising incomes and consumer goods, while others faced ongoing challenges. The tornado disproportionately affected rural populations, highlighting inequalities within American society. Many farmers were already dealing with the prices of their crops dropping during the 1920s, and this natural disaster only made their situation even worse. In the social aspect, the disaster brought communities together. Neighbors helped one another rebuild, and aid from local organizations provided support for those in need. However, recovery was very slow during this time, and many families never fully regained what they had lost during the time the tornado struck. Several communities were almost completely demolished, which required them to be rebuilt immediately, which altered the psychical and social landscape of the region.

Making a Change

One of the many long-term effects of the Tri-State Tornado was its impact on scientific research and public policy. Meteorologists began to study tornadoes more seriously than ever before. They wanted to understand a tornado’s formation and behaviors. Over time, the extensive research contributed to improved forecasting techniques that will greatly help citizens if another tornado were to attack. Although these changes were not immediate and they would take some time. The disaster did however greatly shift how we predict the weather. Eventually, the U.S. government became more willing to invest in meteorological research and warning systems. By the mid-20th century, tornado warnings became more common, significantly reducing the death tolls in future storms. This natural disaster also greatly influenced architecture and construction. People in affected areas advocated for sturdy homes and structures. Although it would take a while to build, people got to work with constructing stronger buildings that would hold up during a tornado.

Interpretations

Historians and scholars have analyzed the Tri-State Tornado from various perspectives. While some historians liked to focus on its meteorological significance, with how tense and scary the tornado was. Other historians liked to examine the social and historical context. Scholarly studies show that the high death toll was not only due to the storm being unusually fast (60-70 mph), but it also struck rural areas and residents had zero warning beforehand. These interpretations align with Lynn Dumenil’s broader arguments that the 1920s were a time of transition, where old traditions and new traditions coexisted.⁹

The Legacy of the Tri-State Tornado

There’s a lot of things the Tri-State Tornado can be known for, it’s the deadliest tornado of all time, and it also holds the record for the longest path length in history. It led to increased interest in tornado research and eventually contributed to the development of how we get natural disaster warnings. Over time, scientists gained a better understanding of severe weather and because of this, we can help reduce the impact future storms may have. The disaster also serves as a reminder that the rapid technological advances did not eliminate the vulnerability that was still present. Even if the twenties were filled with modernization, natural disasters were able to have devastating effects on people.

Conclusion

The Tri-State Tornado outbreak of 1925 was more than just a natural disaster; it also serves as a reflection of the broader tensions of the 1920s. While the decade is often remembered for its prosperity and innovation, the tornado revealed the limits of that progress, especially in rural areas in America. By taking a look at news and weather reports that happened during this time, and scholarly interpretations, we can see how the events fit into a larger context of the 1920s. At the end of the day, the Tri-State Tornado highlights how important it is to prepare for incoming storms and natural disasters, to properly inform citizens that something dangerous is coming, and how scientific understanding on the weather is important. It reminds us that even in times of growth and optimism, societies must remain aware of their vulnerabilities. The disaster still remains relevant today as we are still facing environmental challenges and it still holds many records to this day. 

Bibliogrpahy

1. Atteberry, Todd. 2025. Tracing the Scars of Hell.
2. Bailey, Cody, and Isaiah Calalang. 2025. “Remembering the 1925 Tri-State Tornado.” Eyewitness News (WEHT/WTVW). March 18, 2025. https://www.tristatehomepage.com/news/local-news/posey-county/remembering-the-1925-tri-state-tornado/.
3. Blanchard, W. O. “The Murphysboro Tornado.” The Scientific Monthly 23, no. 5 (1926): 434–46. http://www.jstor.org/stable/7421.
4. Dumenil, Lynn. 2007. The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York, Ny: Hill And Wang, [Ca.
5. Museum, Evansville. 2025. “The Tri-State Tornado: Tragedy and Resilience | Evansville Museum of Arts, History & Science.” Emuseum.org. 2025. https://www.emuseum.org/exhibitions/the-tri-state-tornado-tragedy-and-resilience.
6. US Department of Commerce, NOAA, National Weather Service. 2020. “1925 Tornado.” Weather.gov. 2020. https://www.weather.gov/pah/1925Tornado.

1. Dumenil, Lynn. 2007. The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York, Ny: Hill And Wang, [Ca.
   ‌ ︎
2. Dumenil, Lynn. 2007. The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York, Ny: Hill And Wang, [Ca. ︎
3. US Department of Commerce, NOAA, National Weather Service. 2020. “1925 Tornado.” Weather.gov. 2020. https://www.weather.gov/pah/1925Tornado. ︎
4. Blanchard, W. O. “The Murphysboro Tornado.” The Scientific Monthly 23, no. 5 (1926): 434–46. http://www.jstor.org/stable/7421. ︎
5. Atteberry, Todd. 2025. Tracing the Scars of Hell.
   ‌ ︎
6. Bailey, Cody, and Isaiah Calalang. 2025. “Remembering the 1925 Tri-State Tornado.” Eyewitness News (WEHT/WTVW). March 18, 2025. https://www.tristatehomepage.com/news/local-news/posey-county/remembering-the-1925-tri-state-tornado/.
   ‌ ︎
7. Museum, Evansville. 2025. “The Tri-State Tornado: Tragedy and Resilience | Evansville Museum of Arts, History & Science.” Emuseum.org. 2025. https://www.emuseum.org/exhibitions/the-tri-state-tornado-tragedy-and-resilience.
   ‌ ︎
8. Dumenil, Lynn. 2007. The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York, Ny: Hill And Wang, [Ca. ︎
9. Dumenil, Lynn. 2007. The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York, Ny: Hill And Wang, [Ca. ︎

The opening of the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York City was at the end of the 1920s. Scholars often note that the 1920s was a progressive era, and the museum helped with it being progressive. The museum’s origins were diverse because it was hiring racial and gender minorities, which would be considered unheard of during that era. Women and people from different backgrounds working at the museum helped cause the museum’s success. The museum’s original collection had a decent amount of contemporary art that was donated to, or purchased by, the museum. Art enthusiasts considered these paintings as new and revolutionary compared to typical art styles at the time. The MoMA currently sits as one of the most popular museums in New York and for art in general due to its success during the 1920s.

The original idea for the MoMA was in 1928 by three important women: Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, Lillie P. Bliss, and Mary Quinn Sullivan, known collectively as “The Ladies”, who came up with the idea for the MoMA over lunch, as the story goes. On March 7, 1928, Lillie and Aldrich were at a social gathering in Jerusalem where apparently they came up with the idea.¹ They wanted a place where they could display the trendiest and newest art at that time, namely contemporary art. Abby Rockefeller wrote about why she wanted the museum in the first place, “I began to think of women whom I knew in New York City, who cared deeply for beauty and who bought pictures, women who would be willing, and had faith enough, to help start a museum of contemporary art.”² She wanted a place that she and other women would be able to experience and enjoy the arts. The Ladies were daughters and wives of some of America’s wealthiest families living in New York, with Abby being the daughter-in-law of John D. Rockefeller. “The Ladies” were able to pool together their resources along with inviting investors and succeeded in opening the MoMA on November 7, 1929. The founding director of the MoMA, Alfred H. Barr Jr. set a goal for the museum to be “the greatest museum of modern art in the world” by helping everyone, and not only art experts, to enjoy art by understanding it.³

The MoMA had a decently sized Board of Trustees that helped it during its first couple of years. Three major trustees who helped the MoMA during this time were A. Conger Goodyear, Paul J. Sachs, and Josephine Boardman Crane. A. Conger Goodyear was a railroad and lumber tycoonist who also was the MoMA’s first president. Goodyear had previous museum experience from working at the Buffalo Art Museum from 1912-1928. While working there at that time, he played fast and loose with the museum’s money to acquire artwork that the museum might not have acquired otherwise. His actions sparked some controversy among other trustees, which resulted in Conger being voted out of the Buffalo AKG Art Museum’s Board of Trustees.⁴ Aldrich Rockefeller wanted Conger to be president of MoMA due to his accomplishments at the Buffalo AKG Art Museum and his ability to acquire paintings that the MoMA probably could not. Paul J. Sachs was a professor at Harvard who helped finance the MoMA in its early years. As the Board was searching for a director of the museum, Sachs was the one to recommend one of his former students, Alfred H. Barr Jr. Sachs also donated to the museum some of his drawings from his early career. Josephine Boardman Crane helped the museum by donated her Russian art collection and also offered fiscal aid. Shortly before the grand opening of the MoMA, the Stock Market crash had just hit the world. But with the help of multiple trustees, the mere idea of the MoMA was not lost to the trash bin. Since all of the trustees came from rich families, they were able to provide help to the MoMA during this trying time.

The MoMA originally opened at a different location from where it currently stands. When the MoMA opened, it was located at the Heckscher Building on 730 Fifth Avenue, not on 11 West 53rd Street, which is two streets away from the Heckscher Building. The Heckscher Building was home to the MoMA for 3 years, until 1932 when they moved to a different building. The MoMA was located in the Heckscher Building for multiple reasons. The Heckscher Building was one of the very few skyscrapers (it would not be considered a skyscraper by today’s standards) in New York City and it had the reputation of being “The Tower of Trade.” Other famous establishments also were renting floors on the Heckscher Building, so the moniker had precedence. The fact that the Heckscher Building could be easily seen from anywhere in New York City, along with its prestigious reputation, made the location perfect for the MoMA.

The opening of the MoMA was not all sunshine and rainbows because John D. Rockefeller Jr. did not like Modern art. John D. Rockefeller Jr. was the son of John D. Rockefeller and husband to Aldrich Rockefeller. Although John D. Rockefeller Jr. did like art and was an art collector who helped fund the Cloisters—a museum designed to collect Medieval Art—John D. Rockefeller Jr. simply disliked Modern Art. Even though Aldrich Rockefeller was the founder of MoMA and played a very important role in it, John D. Rockefeller Jr. chose not to support the MoMA in its initial years. Although John D. Rockefeller Jr. disliked Modern Art and avoided it the best he could, he did not try to prevent his wife from acquiring pieces of Modern Art and yet he never paid for them.⁵ John D. Rockefeller Jr. was a Baptist, and in the 1920s Baptists preferred not to deal with secular art like Modern Art of the era. John D. Rockefeller Jr. was a conservative, and conservatives often disliked Modern Art from that era because it was challenging traditional norms. Though John D. Rockefeller Jr. did donate to the MoMA, it was not until later in the 1940’s. And due to his funding, the MoMA was then moved to its modern location where it is still standing today.

The original MoMA gallery contained paintings by Vincent van Gogh, Georges Seurat, Paul Cézanne, and Paul Gauguin. When the MoMA was created, it was not able to afford the purchase of any artwork; so instead, they received donations of artwork. Alfred H. Barr wanted the MoMA to display newer pieces instead of older, which was difficult since most of the MoMA’s collections were already over one hundred years old. Alfred H. Barr got rid of the older paintings by stating “a torpedo moving through time, its nose the ever advancing present, its tail the ever receding past of 50 to 100 years ago.”⁶ Alfred H. Barr was a Harvard professor who also loved contemporary art. During his time at Harvard, he helped to run the Harvard Society of Contemporary Art. In July, 1929, he was interviewed for the position of founding director, and on August 12, 1929, was accepted for the position.⁷ As its director, Barr sent Anson Goodyear—Anson being a member of the Board of Trustees—to travel to Europe to collect six paintings by van Gogh, Seurat, Cezanne and Gauguin, whose exhibition was very successful for both Barr and the MoMA.⁸

Themes of the 1920s

The 1920s was an era that challenged the old traditional norms from the previous era, the Victorian era. The Victorian era held strict social and gendered norms that favored traditionalism and did not like feminism. After the conclusion of the First World War, America challenged Victorian thought by consuming the works of modernist philosophers. It sparked such ideas as the New Women, a rise of secular culture, pluralism, and an expansion of new ways of thinking. The MoMA embodied the rise of modernism in America by connecting many of these themes to the MoMA in some way.

Vincent van Gogh, Georges Seurat, Paul Cézanne and Paul Gauguin were deliberately chosen to be the MoMA’s first exhibit. The reason was because all four of these painters were impressionist painters who also helped revolutionize the art world. Impressionism as a form of art is described as capturing the sense of time passing by with the changing of lighting, where the subject is often something found in the modern world such as a building, a crowd of people, a pier, or a park. Impressionism came about from the rejection of a previous form of art, which was supposed to be the accepted standard for art: Neoclassicism and Romanticism. Both forms of art are very similar to each other, in that they are typically still images of important historical events and subjects. The difference between these two forms of art lie in their treatments of the subjects. Neoclassicism is a rigid form of art based on the Greco-Roman form of art and favors historical scenes. Romanticism is a similar form but focuses on nature and the subject’s emotions. Impressionism is a rejection of those forms, just as the 1920s was a rejection of the Victorian values and norms. These painters all influenced the discipline of impressionism. And because the MoMA chose to display these painters’ works as its first exhibits, it showed everyone that they were going to revolutionize the enjoyment of art and what a museum should display in their exhibits.

Abby Rockefeller was a very important component in the creation of the MoMA. Out of the three founding women, Abby Rockefeller created, actively participated in, and did the most amount of work for the MoMA. Unlike most other women during that era who may later step out of the spotlight after creating a museum or let go of that idea, Abby was different. Abby was a member of the Board of Trustees and also was the MoMA’s treasurer. Due to her work in the MoMA, she gained new titles and responsibilities throughout her years. When she worked at the MoMA, she was often a negotiator between Barr and Goodyear due to their disagreements. Elsewhere in Abby’s life, she was a women’s suffragist and helped women with their economic and social disadvantages.  She was a member and chairwoman of the Young Women’s Christian Association for twenty years, and donated large amounts of money to them.⁹ She used her privileged status to help underprivileged women to have better lives and advocated for women’s progress. These traits the Abby presented are similar to historian Lynn Dumenil’s interpretation of the New Women.¹⁰ The New Women challenges traditional gender norms established in the Victorian age. Common people who challenged these notions of normalcy were known as flappers and women suffragists. It is the same to say that Abby Rockefeller is associated with the New Women due to her challenging of traditional gender norms of the 1920s.

The MoMA did not just hire white people but was a diverse place of employment. Though technically hired in the early 30s, Soichi Sunami, a Japanese-American photographer, showed that the MoMA embraced the ideals of modernism and pluralism founded in the 1920s. Soichi Sunami was a photographer who was a member of the Seattle Art Club, participated in multiple exhibits, and studied under painter John Sloan.¹¹ Soichi Sunami was the living embodiment of the MoMA’s focus on diversity of the 1920s. In the 1920s, many groups of people experienced a cultural and economic boom. Japanese Americans were one of those groups, due to their tight-knit families, their focus on education, along with their support of each other out of poverty. Soichi was born in Japan but lived in New York City for a long time. His talent caused him to be recognized, with Aldrich Rockefeller asking him to work at the MoMA in 1930 due to his successful career.¹² This caused him to have a very successful forty-year long career working at the MoMA.

Conclusion

The MoMA was one of the last events that occurred at the end of the 1920s. It was a radical idea that came about due to the climate of the 20s. The MoMA’s existence challenged the traditional Victorian social norms by predominantly displaying impressionist art, by the founders of the MoMA being all women, and by hiring diverse people. These decisions caused the MoMA to be the embodiment of the themes of the 1920s. Since these themes were entrenched in the MoMA’s identity, they fueled the success of the MoMA in the late 1920s early 1930s and to become the very successful museum as we know it today.

1. Kate Walbert, “Lillie P. Bliss, ” in Inventing the Modern: Untold Stories of the Women Who Shaped The Museum of Modern Art, ed. Ann Temkin and Romy Sliver-Kohn, (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 2024) 64 ︎
2. Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, “MoMA through Time,” MoMA, accessed Apr 21, 2026, https://www.moma.org/interactives/moma_through_time/1920/three-women-have-a-vision/. ︎
3. “The Museum of Modern Art history,” MoMA, accessed April 21, 2026, https://www.moma.org/about/mission-statement/history#:~:text=In%20the%20late%201920s%2C%20three,Its%20founding%20director%2C%20Alfred%20H. ︎
4. “A. Conger Goodyear” Buffalo AKG Art Museum, accessed April 30, 2026, https://buffaloakg.org/person/conger-goodyear ︎
5. David Rockefeller, interviewed by Sharon Zane, transcript, January 17 1991, The Museum Of Modern Art Oral History Program. https://buffaloakg.org/person/conger-goodyear ︎
6. Alfred H. Barr Jr. “Time” MoMA, accessed on April 21, 2026, https://www.moma.org/interactives/moma_through_time/1920/starting-a-collection-from-scratch/ ︎
7. Sybil Gordon Kantor, Alfred H. Barr, Jr., and the Intellectual Origins of the Museum of Modern Art, (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002) 211. ︎
8. Kantor, Origins of MoMA 190-214. ︎
9. “Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, 1874-1948,” Rockefeller Archive Center, accessed on March 31, 2026. https://rockarch.org/resources/about-the-rockefellers/abby-aldrich-rockefeller/
   ︎
10. Lynn Dumenil, Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s, (New York: Hill and Wang, 1995), 99. ︎
11. Kathy Muir, “Soichi Sunami,” Seattle Camera Club, accessed April 30, 2026, https://www.seattlecameraclub.com/soichi_sunami.html ︎
12. Muir, “Soichi Sunami,” Seattle Camera Club, accessed April 30, 2026, ︎

Bibliography and Suggested Resources

“A. Conger Goodyear.” Buffalo AKG Art Museum. accessed April 30, 2026.

“Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, 1874-1948.” Rockefeller Archive Center. accessed on March 31, 2026.

Barr, Alfred H. Jr. “MoMA through Time.” Museum of Modern Art . accessed on April 21, 2026.

Dumenil, Lynn. Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. (New York: Hill and Wang. 1995)

Kantor, Sybil Gordon. Alfred H. Barr, Jr., and the Intellectual Origins of the Museum of Modern Art. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002)

Muir, Kathy. “Soichi Sunami.” Seattle Camera Club. accessed April 30, 2026.

Rockefeller, Abby Aldrich. “MoMA through Time.” Museum of Modern Art. accessed Apr 21, 2026.

Rockefeller, David. interviewed by Sharon Zane, transcript, January 17 1991, The Museum Of Modern Art Oral History Program.

“The Museum of Modern Art history.” Museum of Modern Art. accessed April 21, 2026.

Walbert, Kate. “Lillie P. Bliss. ” in Inventing the Modern: Untold Stories of the Women Who Shaped The Museum of Modern Art. ed. Ann Temkin and Romy Sliver-Kohn. (New York: The Museum of Modern Art. 2024)

The first chapter has a heavy focus on economic and political history. Economically the chapter focuses heavily on the great depression and business. Politically the chapter had a big focus on President Coolidge, States, and War. The chapter is geared towards great man history although it does focus on the issues of common people. The chapter ideology wise can be described as traditional. For one it disapproves of modern cultural trends associated with the twenties. This is clear as it uses the word “disillusion” and says that old traditions were “under attack”. The chapters conservatism was also shown as it was not found of Marxism. ¹.

While a lot was covered in “TheUnitedStates” (1964) importent parts of the twenties recivied little attention. The rise of black culture through jazz was one these ways. The chapter neglects to talk about African American intelcualsim, that was a importent part of the Harelem rensiance that occured during the decade. The evoultion of female culture during the decade was downplayed as the chapter said very little about how flappers changed gender norms. The social aspect of immigration also was scarcely mentioned. Staying within the world of immigration the chatper also did not mention the Scopes trial.

The second chapter was more diverse in regards to its content. While politics and great men were still mentioned social history was also prevelent. The top terms that represented social history were immigration and Jazz. The top terms politically were war and states. Economics were less of a factor in this chapter as none of the top words were directly related to it. Ideologically the chapter chapter was less conservative and more liberal. For one the KKK within it were describes as “Hooded Hoodlums” and the Scopes the result of the scopes trial was described as “judicial lynching”. A large portion of the chapter also featured the Harlem Renaissance and the culturally of the younger generation. This cultural was featured through the discussion of flappers and bootleg culture. Immigration wise the chapter focused on how immigrants dealt with discrimination through nativism, and on how they helped build the nation.².

The articles general point that history of the decade has become more inclusive over time was true. Economically this was evident as the best book “The Dollar Decade: Business Ideas in the 1920s” on traditional business history was from 1954. However not all books followed the general trends of their era. This was clear as the article mentioned a work called “The lean years: “A History of the American Worker, 1920-1933” from 1960 that focused on the decline of the labor movement during the twenties. The article also featured a social vs more traditional approach in regards to more overtly political topics. The focuses of these topics evolved as The KKK was one of such topics. This is evident as the book “Women of the Klan: Racism and Gender in the 1920s” (1991) which was featured, focused on progressive aspects of the Klan, while “Hooded Americanism: The History of the Ku Klux Klan” (1964) takes a more holistic approach.³. ⁴. ⁵.

Understanding the differences of how history is written throughout different times is important This is because it provides context for why people saw things that way they did. The history that we read today gives us this context also. The historiography today is more inclusive overall to people but it cannot be defined as more professional as modern historians have great bias as well.

Professional football was nothing like it is today as the sport was actually influenced by the much more popular college football. This occurred because the working class and some middle class fans of college football wanted to engage with the sport in a more direct way, rather than read about in the newspaper. As a result, by the late 1890s hundreds of amateur teams were formed. The players were mostly working class amateurs. It was not hard to see these games as in many cases they were free to attend.¹. 

By the 1910s things had begun to change. There was now an established rivalry between the Canton Bulldogs and the Massillon Tigers that put pro football on the path to forming a national league, as it represented a blueprint for pro ball to make more serious profits. The addition of star athlete Jim Thorpe to Canton, represented that rivalries need star players. Thorpe was well beyond what the average star was, due to his versatility. This versatility was clear as he was an Olympic star athlete, baseball player, and football player. His impact was certainly felt, as attendance for the two games against Massillon went up from averaging 1,200 people to 6,250. Other rivalries in pro football formed and were successful as well. Despite this, some teams ended up with deficits by year’s end. This was because non rivalry games made little profit, teams were paying their collegiate players more, and teams were backed by sponsors that were simply trying to break even.².

As the sport became more complicated executives were left with two main options. One they could reduce team payroll, weaken team strength, and revert to a lower semipro status. The other option was that executives could pour money into teams to improve the teams performance, and to draw larger crowds. Neither of these options were viable. As debts for teams continued to increase, executives believed that a league could improve this situation through the regulation it would bring. For example under a league format teams could control the salaries of players. Under this format the luster of a national champion would be present. The best teams from the Northeast and Midwest would match up with each under the format as well. ³.  

Early days

By late 1919 it was becoming clear that professional football was moving in the direction of forming a league, as it was starting to take a firm hold on the public. This was seen as something that would create issues for college football. For one, the idea was floated that many promising football players would skip college and go straight to the pros. It was also thought that even if players did go to college, some would leave early to join the professional league. These concerns were financially based. They were backed by the fact that owners from the pros could offer college players inducements that in college were not available. College players for instance had to work their way through school, which did not leave them with much money, whereas a college aged player who became a star could make 500 dollars a game in pro football.⁴. 

Despite the concerns from the college level, pro football still decided to move forward in creating a league. Vague talk about doing this had been common for 15 years. The man who helped spearhead these efforts was Ralph Hay. Hay, the owner of the Canton Bulldogs, invited representatives from three other teams in the state to an organizational meeting at his showroom on August 20, 1920. At the meeting these men agreed upon a broad outline of a new association. After this the other team managers instructed Hay to get in touch with executives of other strong teams from the midwest and western New York. Nearly a month later a deal was ready to occur. Hay followed the advice he received, as he gathered  representatives from 11 professional football teams from across Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, and New York. This meeting occurred inside of the Jordan and Hupmobile autoshop in downtown Canton Ohio. Since Hay’s office was not big enough to fit everyone, these football pioneers sat in the showroom, on the running boards and fenders of 3,000 dollar cars.⁵. ⁶.  

Once the Massillon Tigers withdrew due to severe financial strain , a league known as the American Football League (AFL) was formed on September 17, 1920 at this next meeting between executives. The league of course needed a president, this choice proved to be an easy one, as the team representatives unanimously picked Jim Thorpe, not for his administrative skills but because he was universally recognized, and someone who could bring instant credibility to the league. These reasons were proven correct as the selection of Thorpe garnered more media attention than the creation of the league itself. A membership fee of 100 dollars for each team was also established. Teams despite this did not come up with any money. Well known player, coach and later owner George Hallas said about the meeting “I doubt that there was a hundred bucks in the room.” ⁷. ⁸.  

One of Thorpe’s first moves as commissioner was that he appointed a three man committee to draft a constitution and by-laws that would be adopted in 1921. As part of this constitution several major motions were approved. One of such motions was that all teams had to send A. F Ranney, the secretary of the league, a list of players they used during the 1920 season by January. The reason for this was so clubs could sign the same players for 1921, if they wished. Another motion said that all teams had to add to their letterheads “Member of the American Professional Football Association.”⁹.

Football in the 1920s

When the AFL was born, football on the field had some familiarities with today’s game, while many other aspects were extremely different. The field itself, like today, was 100 yards in length and had 10 yard deep endzones. However the goal posts stood on the goal line rather than on the end zone back line. This made field goals and extra points easier. Hashmarks did not exist during this infancy stage. This meant that the next play began where the last one concluded, even if it was a foot from the sideline. If a player was knocked out of bounds the ball was placed at the area inbounds where he went out. The result of this was that the teams that this happened to had to waste a play, simply to get the ball into operating territory. Passing the ball also had some differences. The passer had to throw from 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage, which greatly reduced potential deception. In addition if a pass fell incomplete in the end zone it was a touchback, and the opposing team was given the ball on their 20 yard line. Due to this the average team during the league’s first season likely passed only 5 times a game. Coaching was also extremely limited as coaches were surprisingly enough, not allowed to coach from the sidelines. As a result of this the quarterback and or team captain had to devise strategy during a game. ¹⁰.

Besides just different rules teams during this infancy stage had different strategies. Offensively teams were very conservative. For example unless a team was near the opponents endzone a punt was almost certain on third down. The idea behind this was that if there was a bad pass from the center or if the punter fumbled, the punter could recover the ball, thus giving the team another chance to kick on fourth down. This ideology of conservatism was so prevalent that on occasion a punt returner who caught the ball on his goal line would punt the ball right back to the other team. The general concept for this conservatism was that the opposing team would make a mistake that could be capitalized on.¹¹.

Equipment during 1920 was of course nowhere near the same quality of today. However it had improved slightly from a decade prior. The best helmet courtesy of A. G. Spalding and Brothers now had elastic webbing in its crowns to absorb blows. Some simpler headgear was so soft and pliable that a player could fold it up into his pocket. All players wore wool jerseys which absorbed sweat that for better or worse increased a players weight during a game. ¹². 

The Role of Walter Camp

The rise of Pro Football was supported by the founder of football at large, Walter Camp. Camp’s positive view on the sport influenced his take that the sports world needed to prepare for the sports rise. He believed that this preparation should be done through giving the sport a clear position and place in the overall sports landscape of the nation. Camp believed that once this perspective was gained, by the pro player the pro game could “grow and expand”. He then closed by saying the only way that pro football would fall would be if players stopped playing the game after college. Camp said this was unlikely as players still have their football ability when they graduate between the ages of 22 to 25.¹³. 

Despite Camp’s endorsement and the formation of a new league, not everything was going smoothly for pro football. For one, Jim Thorpe’s vision of having the league take its place among other big league sports was not going well. To Thorpe this meant expanding teams into larger markets such as New York. The idea’s potential unreliability became clear, when a game between Canton and Buffalo which was a trial for the concept did poorly audience wise. For one only 6,000 fans showed up to the game at the Polo Grounds in New York. These fans that were in attendance lacked enthusiasm, as there was no loud cheering. This proved to be a stark contrast to the 30,000 people that attended a Rutgers Nebraska game a few weeks later at the same stadium. Teams tried to create interest in the sport in other ways. Some of these ways included sponsoring gimmick teams, and creating circuslike off- field activities. Games that featured these additions drew profitable crowds but did not create loyal fanbases because pro football itself lacked meaning.¹⁴. ¹⁵.

Black Players in the league

The league, despite its initial issues, was ahead of its time in a major way, black players were able to partake. Although still very different from today’s league from 1920 to 1926 there were nine African American players. In 1920 Fritz Pollard and Bobby Marshall became the first players to break the color line. He was not only a player but was a coach as well. This progress unfortunately was short lived, as after 1926 all five black players that were still in the league departed now known as the NFL since 1922. The combination of the league losing teams that season coupled with the large number of talented white players resulted in black players being the first to get axed never to return. While there were a few cases of black players in the league after this, most owners would not pay black players during the great depression. This is because they thought it would be a negative look to employ blacks while there were white players who were suffering. ¹⁶.

The founding and the subsequent years of the NFL in some ways represent key themes of the twenties, while other aspects of this represent older themes. The theme of sports becoming more culturally prominent is one of these ways, as the NFL despite not having the same success as other sports such as Baseball and Boxing did still enjoy a limited amount of rising relevance. The struggles of the sport initially represent the old theme of young sports leagues going through growing pains. The early years of the league represented the liberalism of the twenties black players were included. However the racism of the twenties also was represented as black players by the end of the decade were essentially shut out from the league. Most broadly the founding of the NFL and the subsequent years after this represents the core theme that the twenties was dominated by businessmen from the private sector.

Historical Significance

Citations

Bibliography

“Black players in Professional American Football.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Last modified May 5, 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_players_in_Professional_American_Football.

Coenen, Craig. From the Sandlots to the Super Bowl: The National Football League, 1920-1967. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2005.

The Dispatch. “Professional Football Is Peril To Life of Pastime in Colleges.” November 27, 1919.

Klein, Christopher. “The Birth of the National Football League.” History.com. September 4, 2014. https://www.history.com/news/the-birth-of-the-national-football-league.

Peterson, Robert. Pigskin: The Early Years of Pro Football. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.

The Spokane Press. “Pro Football Fails to Get Going Strong.” December 14, 1920.

The Springfield Daily Republican. “Pro Football Coming Sport Says Mr. Camp.” December 1, 1920.