Hello and welcome to Hist Fest 2021. My name's Rebecca Adil and I'm the director of Hist Fest and I'm so very excited to share this weekend's events with you. We have a fantastic assortment of talks and discussions coming up so please do check out everything else that's going on via the website www.histfest.org Before we get started, on behalf of Hist Fest and the British Library I'd like to acknowledge the passing of His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh and pay tribute to his long public service. Now, before we get on with the first event there are just a couple of points of housekeeping to note. Using the menu above you can provide feedback on the event and also, if you wish, donate to the British Library. The Library is a charity and your support really does help to open up a world of knowledge and inspiration to everyone. Your feedback is also incredibly important in helping the Library plan future cultural events. There you will also find a tab with a link to the bookshop where you can browse a range of titles by the festival's many speakers. At the end of the discussion there'll be a short audience Q&A. Please do submit your questions using the box below the video. Also below the video are social media links should you wish to continue the conversation on different platforms afterwards. Without further ado, I'm going to hand you over to today's sponsors to introduce you to the panellists for Artemisia Mistress of Blood. Hello, I'm Alexandra Whitaker, the PR manager at Fellowes Auctioneers. Fellowes is one of the UK's most established auction houses with a focus on luxury watches, designer brands and unique pieces of jewelry. We're delighted to support Artemisia Mistress of Blood featuring art historian and presenter of the BBC's Britain's Lost Masterpieces, Dr. Benda Gravener, historian and author of The Beauty and the Terror, Dr. Catherine Fletcher and art historian and host of the Art Matters podcast, Farron Gibson. Enjoy. Thanks for joining us for our discussion of Artemisia Dzyntylewski's life and amazing work. She was a formidable artist at a time when it was not easy for women to train as an artist, let alone reach her level of incredible success. I do want to note that as we go into Dzyntylewski's story, we'll be discussing an instance of rape. So I'd like to flag that as sensitive material right now. My name is Farron Gibson. I'm an art historian and your inquisitive hostess for this event. I'm joined by Catherine Fletcher, professor of history at Manchester Metropolitan University. She is an author of several fascinating books, including her most recent book, The Beauty and the Terror, an alternative history to the Italian Renaissance. We're also joined by Binder Grobner, an art historian, broadcaster, and a downright detective when it comes to uncovering lost masterpieces. He also curated the Bright Souls exhibition in 2019, which was the first UK exhibition on Britain's 17th century women artists. This evening, we're going to look at a few of Dzyntylewski's works and see what they can reveal about her life and painting style and life in Italy at that time. Please be sure to send through any questions you have as we discuss, and we'll have a look at some of those towards the end. So let's begin with our first image. It is her allegory of painting, which is believed to be a self-portrait. Catherine, maybe you could set the scene for us a bit by telling us about Dzyntylewski's early life. Yeah, well, this painting is actually from quite late in her career when she was at the English court in the 1630s, but we have to go back really four decades to her birth in 1593 in Rome into a family already very much involved in the Baroque art scene. Her father, Orazio Dzyntylewski, was actually a court painter in England at the time of that particular work that we've just seen. So Artemisia was born into a family of artists, which of course is one of the classic ways that the women artists of this period get their training. It's actually very relatively uncommon for women to go out of the household to train as an artist as men would do. So Artemisia comes in with some advantages and already in her teens, she is creating extraordinary work. Let me just tell you a little bit about one of her first paintings. It's a Susanna and the Elders. Susanna and the Elders is a really popular subject for biblical paintings at this time. It shows the virtuous young Susanna in her bath being spied on by two lecherous old men, the Elders. And most versions of Susanna and the Elders show Susanna either completely oblivious to what these old guys are doing or even perhaps slightly enjoying it. Artemisia completely changes that and she paints Susanna who is traumatised and horrified at these old men and she's only 17. So it's an extraordinary start to the career of this teenage artist. But it very, very quickly, her life takes quite an unpleasant turn.  She of course says that that is not true. It's a moralist rumour and it's very important for women in this period to maintain the reputation of being chased. And then things get even worse when in 1611 she is assaulted by one of her tutors, Agostino Tassi, a man who has been brought into the household to teach her the complex process of trompe-loy painting, the kind of painting that you do on ceilings to give a three-dimensional effect. Instead of taking his job seriously, what he does is he takes advantage of his position and he rapes the young Artemisia and then tells her that he's going to marry her and goes on to sexually exploit her over an extended period. There's some fairly horrific testimony which I'm not necessarily going to go into in detail at this point. But eventually, after some months, Artemisia's father reports him and the rapist is put on trial. And in this period, this is a trial basically of between these two men, between the father whose property his daughter has been devalued because she's no longer a virgin and the rapist. And it almost becomes a trial of Artemisia herself because she is questioned under torture about what had happened. They use thumb screws as a method of torture. It's fairly horrific. She gives her testimony, she insists that she was forced into it, that she actually tried to defend herself with a knife, that she wanted to kill him. And in the end, after some further testimony from a witness about the very, very dubious past of Tassie who had previously tried to have his wife murdered, Tassie is found guilty. It's a horrific and traumatic trial. And one that has often been seen as very key to understanding Artemisia's life and certain of her works which we will come on to as we will see. She paints some very, very powerful women. And we see even in those very early instances that she is absolutely sure about defending herself and defending her reputation when she is effectively put on trial by the legal system. Yeah. Well, I'm wondering now, I was thinking we should talk about allegory of painting first, just because it's possibly a self-paint, a self-cultured. But now I'm wondering if what you've just explained would be a good way of going into Judith and Hall of Furnace in terms of how critics and historians have often connected the events of her life to some of the imagery that she did in the time that she lived in Florence just after the trial. So do you guys think it might be good to go into Judith and Hall of Furnace perhaps right now and we can come back to the other? Well, sorry. I think while we've got the allegory of painting up, can I just say something about it? Because I think it's, although Catherine rightly said, it's not an early work from the beginning of her life that we're talking about now, it does encapsulate a very distinctive approach to painting. So we don't know exactly the circumstances in which this self-portrait came to be. Or indeed, even when it was painted, it's worth pointing out at this early stage in the discussion, there's so much about Artemisia Gentileschi's life that we don't unfortunately know. And I'm not saying that as a sort of get out of jail free car for when I get things wrong in this discussion. But unfortunately, for reasons we'll go into, there's so much we don't know about her life. But this painting, this wonderful self-portrait, this wonderful allegory of painting, is recorded in the collection of King Charles I in the 1630s when she comes to London briefly. It seems not to be recorded as a self-portrait. And it's interesting how, although it almost certainly is her in a sense, or certainly her features a model on her in the painting, it's interesting how it wasn't regarded as a conventional self-portrait. And it just tells us so much about how differently she approached topics like this throughout her career and that's what makes her such an exciting artist. She's, as you can see, she's sort of rather acrobatically approaching the canvas with a brush in her hand. She's sort of really ready to do battle with the canvas in front of her and a palette in the other hand. And that's so different from conventional male artists self-portraits at the period. In fact, very often in male self-portraits you don't even see the artist with a paint brush in their hand or a palette. They're so often trying to present themselves as not artists, but sort of members of the gentry or even courtiers or noblemen. We might, for example, think in this country quite a well-known self-portrait from about the same time is Sir Anthony Van Dyke's self-portrait, which is a national portrait gallery. And there again, he's dressed in his finery. There's no hint of a brush. Rubens is the same with his gold chain on that's also in the Royal Collection. So Artemisia, she's demonstrating that she does things differently. And it's possible that this portrait was sort of sent ahead of her as a calling card, if you like, sort of element of marketing to the king. And that helped establish some patronage for her when she got here. Well, it's interesting to the name of it as allegory of painting because there are so many paintings at this time that are allegory for this and that spring or abstract ideas like design and drawing and things. So for her to potentially, if this is in fact a self-portrait, show herself as the allegory for painting. That's really interesting and quite bold actually. I think it's a particularly gendered thing because the allegory of painting is female. I mean, the artistic muses are always female, but a lot of the time they're being painted as these idealized women by male artists. And so to have a woman painting a female allegory of painting is in itself a kind of interesting play on some of the gender politics at the time. And something only a woman could do in that, as you said, often allegory version of women. So she's uniquely able to do that, which is quite fun actually. So this was done, she had, well, maybe we should come back to that in terms of the chronology, because she spends a little bit of time in England, I think a bit later. So after the trial, she does get married and she moved to Florence and has a kind of Florentine phase, if you will. So can we maybe look at the second image or have that queued up as we talk about her time in Florence and Judith and Holofernes. So Catherine, maybe you can kick off with that, which was like at that time.  So Italy at this point is not all one country, it's divided into different states. And the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, which has Florence as its capital, is a very nice place to be indeed if you're an artist, because the Grand Duke, Cosmo II, who is the second is keen to commission paintings. So that's good. It's also got a great intellectual scene. So Michelangelo's nephew is there putting together a house to commemorate his famous uncle. So Artemisia gets a commission to paint another allegory, Allegory of Inclination for the Casablanca Roti. And she also gets to know people like Galileo, who is also at the court at this time, who has just published his treatise, The Starry Messenger. She becomes a member of the Florentine Academy, the Academy of Art and Design. And that's quite extraordinary for a woman in Florence in that period. She's the first woman to join the Florentine Academy. So again, it's a real kind of breakthrough move for women artists in that particular part of Italy. And she's also having children.  She has at least four, probably five children during these years in Florence, and is combining that with this huge amount of output with, you know, trying to cultivate patrons as well, because you need to convince these very well-off people that they want to commission you. You need to dress up nicely and go and play the game at court. And there's one instance where she turns up and she plays the lute at a fancy dress party. And there are actually a number of lute plays again, so I think at least one of those is speculated to be a self-portrait. I mean, lots of people like to say that all the Artemisia works are self-portraits one way or the other. And I think there's perhaps a little too much of that going on sometimes. But it's a fascinating world. She and it's one in which she paints this very, very dramatic Judith and Helophonies that we've just seen. So this is a biblical story, like Susanna and the Elders. But it's an incredible take on that particular story. So there are a number of treatments of this work going right back to, well, I mean, Donatello. I think this is Judith by Donatello. There's, in Florence, there's quite a tradition of it.  It's the earlier version by Caravaggio in which there's a kind of rather sort of polite use of a sword to neatly slice the chap's head off. There's not all of that going on here.  And often, artists show maybe before or after the events have happened, don't they? So she's really showing us the gore of what's going on here. Maybe, Bender, you can talk a bit about what's happening in the scene and maybe a bit about the story as well, just in case people watching don't know about the story. So, sure, Judith and Holofernes is an Old Testament tale. And Judith was an Israelite heroine because Holofernes is the general of the advancing, invading a Syrian army at one point. And she decides that she's going to save the day by... Judith is actually a widow. So she decides to put on her very best clothes and take out some treats to go and basically... the word in the Bible is delight. Now, lots of people have thought that means sort of seduced, but it probably just means tempt with all sorts of lovely treats and, most importantly, lots of wine, too. So Holofernes becomes drunk and lies down on his bed as we see here to go to sleep. And that is when Holofernes pounces and chops his head off and takes the head back to the Israelite camp, sticks it on the barricades, and the Assyrian army see this the next morning and they flee in terror, and Judith saves the day. So what's... it's very interesting that Catherine mentioned the Caravaggio's painting of this, which is about 1600. So we're talking about 15 years earlier. And that painting is in Rome. Artemisia may have seen it, but we can't be absolutely sure. But the treatment of the light here, and we may discuss that later on, is very Caravagesque. But in Caravaggio's painting, the slicing of the head is not particularly convincing. It seems Caravaggio was sort of more interested in portraying Judith as this sort of lovely model who's rather delicately sort of wafting a sword over the neck and unconvincingly blood gushes out. But what I think is so exciting about Artemisia's representation here is that she's really thought about what it would be like, the sort of pose and form you'd have to get into to slice a fellow's head off. And in the Bible, we know that it took two goes with the sword to hack it off. So there were quite brutal blows. And what I think we see here with Judith, she's grabbing the head very convincingly in one hand and the sword is coming out. And she's sort of, you can see all the effort in her arms and her shoulders. And quite interesting too is that you can see she's almost recoiling from the blood. She's got her very finest clothes on. And she may be concerned about the blood going on her dress. And this picture, the one we've got on the screen at the moment, she painted this scene as with a number of her compositions. She repeated them. She seems to have been quite the businesswoman. If she had a hit, she did it again. The painting we've got on the screen is actually the second version. The first one she painted shortly after the trial and the rape. And in this one we see here, it's bigger. This one is in Florence in the Uffizi. It was painted for the Medici's. And there is extra gore. That's the really interesting thing. There's much more blood in this one. Otherwise, the composition is pretty identical. And it appears that the blood is spurting towards Judith in quite a precise manner. And it's been pointed out that this matches her friend Galileo's theory of the parabolic projection of liquids like this. So that may be a nod to her friendship with Galileo. And my last point about how I think Artemisia sort of reinvents this pose and gives it a particularly distinctive female approach is that is the presence of the maid. So in the Bible, the maid does not take part in the killing. She's given a name subsequently in the literature. She's called Abra. And generally, artists portray her either sort of off-camera, ready to take the head away, or she's sort of carrying in the corner, not quite sure what to do. But here, Artemisia absolutely makes her party to the killing. She's holding Holofernes down. So they're both at it. And Catherine's quite right to say that sometimes it's a little bit too tempting to see Artemisia's own physiognomy in these various figures. But I don't know. It's probable that we see her here. And it may even be, because the two figures look quite alike, it may even be that we sort of see the same person twice. Well, I wonder, and we're going to come back to discussing models and how difficult it was to have models for a woman artist at that time. So I wonder if that's a factor. But I think what's interesting is that Judith looks quite heroic in my point of view in this painting. And I think that with a lot of baroque art at this time, the idea is that the church is trying to get artists to create this very dramatic, edifying art of biblical themes, classical themes as a sort of instructive moral tool for morality. And so oftentimes I feel like male artists might show Judith or Delilah and Samson as a sort of warning about what women can do to you if you give in to their, you know, give into the buyer and all of these things. And she's showing this from a totally different perspective of the woman as a hero and taking charge, which I think is quite interesting. Yeah, definitely. And as Catherine did mention, this topic was quite favored by the Medici. It's sort of symbolized the smaller force overcoming the bigger one. And of course, as Catherine said, Italy at the time was a series of small states and the Medici's often managed to punch above their weight. And it is perhaps worth, I mean, a lot of people emphasize Artemisia's input into this painting was a kind of reaction to the rape by Agostino Tassi. But it is also worth, I think sometimes that overshadows our understanding of how she worked, but it is also worth mentioning that the paradoxical role of position of women in society at this time, there were so many things they couldn't do. But occasionally, because of the sort of, you know, the aristocratic structure of societies, occasionally women did have absolute power and could be very strong women. So there was a sort of celebration of strong women like this and the Old Testament gave you many examples with which to draw on. The Medici, of course, had their own examples in the family. Marie de Medici is at this time, for much of this period, she's effectively ruling France herself. And so they tap into that. And it's worth mentioning also that Judith was a very common name. So I think Shakespeare calls his two daughters, Susanna and Judith. And we've mentioned both stories already. So that's part of the sort of paradoxical position of women in society at the time. You were supposed to be a strong woman, but in so many ways you couldn't be. Because in Florence itself, you also have the Duchesses and the daughters of the grand Duke and Duchess of Florence. So you have a whole court society in which women are able to play particular roles. In a way, you don't quite have the same thing in Rome because at the papal court it's men and it is often sometimes men and their mistresses. And there's the Roman nobility, but they're not quite on an even level with the pope and the cardinals. So the dynamics of Florence at this point as a city for intellectual women are probably relatively more welcoming. For all that in Rome, I mean, yeah, Urban Year Eighth does allow women to join the Roman Academy. Perhaps it's not quite the same social dynamics as at a court where you have a grand Duchess and where you have, you know, Medici women marrying across European royalty, making all those connections across the continent. Nor is it the same. We'll see a little bit later. She goes to Naples. And again, in Naples, you've got a viceroy. You have the Spanish nobility. You have Spanish noble women there, very present, very much in a court society where women, yeah, they have to place particular roles, but they're able to operate. Of course, one of the ways that Artemisia operates in Florence in this court society is that she has an affair with a nobleman called a Moringi with the knowledge of her husband. And he is quite a significant patron for them. And for a while it seems to go quite well, but it eventually becomes a source of scandal.  On the one hand, they might bring a female artist's patronage. On the other hand, if it just gets all a little bit too much, it might be easier to get out of town. And in fact, that is what Artemisia ends up doing. She ends up with a legal separation from her husband and starts to do her own thing. So, yeah, very, very different circumstances. Before we leave Florence in our story, I guess, and move on to a next painting and kind of babe in her life, I did just want to clarify one thing, and I hope everyone is sending through questions as and when you have them who's watching. We keep saying, oh, it's like Caravaggio, it's Caravagesque. And I thought it might be good to clarify what are some of the visual elements we're talking about, maybe in terms of tinnoprism or that drama. And the Judith and Holofernes is a really good example of that, I think. So, Fender, maybe you can point out some of those, that classic baroque drama and what makes it like a Caravaggio. Yes, very good point, Fern. Thank you. So, Caravaggio, he's one of the great geniuses of Italian painting, and he essentially has one great idea, and it really is a great one, and that is to light his pictures a little bit like a sort of dramatic stage set. And he does this by introducing a single light source. One of the most famous examples is a chapel in Rome, and I should remember the name of it because I was making a film there before the pandemic started, but it's just temporarily left my brain. It's the story of St. Matthew, and he lights the paintings as if they were lit only from the single window in the chapel. And when you do that in a painting, it instantly creates much more drama amongst the characters because you get this great interplay of light and dark, and as you mentioned, it's called tinnoprism. Italian for that contrast, tinnoprosso, so we call it tinnoprism. And that idea was an instant hit in Italian art, and Artemisia's dad through whom she studied so much at the beginning of her career, he was a great friend of Caravaggio and saw lots of his work. So Artemisia adapts this idea, and I think you could position Artemisia. I mean, for example, in the picture we've had on the screen, there is the single light source coming from the top left-hand side and it casts a dramatic light over the whole thing, and it allows you to play as an artist with so many lovely details, particularly the shadow of the blood and the way that the light catches the falls of the various bits of drapery. I think you can make a convincing case, actually, that Artemisia, despite the fact that she was forgotten for so much of art history, actually, she's the sort of the true heir, the best heir of Caravaggio, that next generation after Caravaggio dies, because not only can she do that fantastic light source trick and make all her paintings so dramatic, but in bringing so much more convincing human presence and emotion to so many of these subjects, like Judith and Holofernes, that female view, she actually enhances the drama in a way that Caravaggio couldn't do. We mentioned Caravaggio's own rendering of Judith and Holofernes. As Catherine said, Judith looks like a model that's slightly uncomfortably brought in and never wielded a sword in her life, and that often holds back Caravaggio's pictures, but it doesn't with Artemisia. No, I think that's absolutely right, and I think that for quite a long time, right since the end of the 19th century when she started to be rediscovered, Artemisia was treated as a little bit of a novelty. She was, oh gosh, a woman who can paint, how amazing. And so much of the early rediscovery of her was around the fact that, oh gosh, she's a woman. Oh gosh, she had this terribly exciting, if traumatic life story. And it was very, very focused on a biography, and the painting, the actual quality of the painting got slightly dropped out of the story. And I think it's only very, very recently that people have started saying, look, yes, some of that, what she adds to those sort of genre paintings, the paintings of the biblical subjects, the well-known subjects comes out of the fact that she's a woman and has had particular experiences, but it's not all about her sex. It's also about the fact that she was moving the whole art world forward with that work. And that is something that I think is just about emphasized now, but really even going back 20 or 30 years, it was still very much about the biography. Yeah. So I want to, because we've got another 10 minutes before we go to questions, because time really does fly. So I wanted to talk about another painting, if we can. So I'm quickly changing stories here. And I want to look at our third painting, which is Venus and Cupid. It's quite different from what we were just talking about and an opportunity for us to go into a few other challenges that she experienced, perhaps, as a woman artist and with something as simple as, where do you find models when you're doing a painting of a nude woman or a nude man? I don't know if she did nude men actually, but where do you find these models? So she left Lawrence, as you said, and she went to Rome and then Venice in that next decade and if we could pull up Venus and Cupid. I'd love to talk a bit about what's happening in this scene. And yeah, some of those challenges I just mentioned. One thing I love about this painting, as we'll see shortly is that it, to me, it has like a kind of secret landscape painting in the background. She shows the windows to the back and you can see the greenery to the back. And I think it's just a cheeky little landscape that she inserts in there. It's quite fun. I think one of the extraordinary things about her, just while we're waiting for the image, is the fact that she learns all this classical literature. She is really able to pick up on the references and she has gone from somebody who, when in her teens, at the point of the trial, was describing herself as barely literate. She could just about read a letter. And suddenly, by less than a decade later, she has got the knowledge, got the expertise, got the literacy to participate in the very, very intellectual circles of the Florentine Academy. And that's quite an extraordinary learning curve. And so she starts painting these classical subjects, which alongside the religious subjects are the kind of, those two are the bread and butter of Baroque art, really. And she not only does the Venus and Cupid, she also does Chariska and the Satire, which ties into some work by women writers of the period. We've got the image now, that's lovely. But you can see again, this is a very, very wonderful treatment. Perhaps I'll let Bender say a little bit about the composition and so forth. There's a terrible word in art history, which is called scopophilia.  And when I have to embark on this, it always makes me terribly uncomfortable, but... Sorry. Thank you for teaming me up. There's no denying, actually, that this is a really beautiful depiction of a naked Venus. And I came across, actually, I was reading in the Grove Dictionary of Art, which is kind of the mainstay, one of the foundational texts for art history students. And in the entry for Artemisia, it does mention, it says, rather pejoratively says, the heavy build of her figures and the occasional compositional awkwardness display her lack of conventional training. Now, I think what's so interesting about Artemisia's nudes like this is that they are so different. The two pictures we've discussed before, they're so different in their approach. We may be able to imagine in our minds that one of the, for example, the famous Titian Venus of Urbino, when there's a sort of Jim Thin Venus lying naked there, looking slightly unconvincing. And these are works by artists who have been allowed into the academies, who've studied drawing from life, often from classical statues. So very idealized bodies, not necessarily very convincing or realistic. And here, I think, what's so interesting about Artemisia, as with a number of her nudes that Catherine mentioned, she becomes quite famous for them, quite in demand for subjects like Danii and Bathsheba. This one is very obviously a real woman. And I think it's no less powerful for that.  And it is true that Artemisia was not able to do that formal training. But in fact, I think that makes her pictures all the more convincing and successful because she had to just learn from herself and maybe her female friends. Or she wasn't sort of shoehorned into that slightly artificial style. And that's what I think we see so successfully here. Later, when it was more common to learn through the academies, rather than as an apprentice, women artists weren't allowed to sit in on the new drawing classes and things. And there's writing about how they felt that they suffered for that, that they weren't getting the practice that they needed. And I know, Catherine, you've spoken before about how challenging it was for her to find models. Can you talk a bit about that? You were talking about being chased early. That's not allowed. Well, it's funny because this work is really in demand from her patrons. Particularly once she's established in Naples after about 1630. She has her own workshop. More people want these than she can supply. And she's very, very shrewd businesswoman. Marketing her work, sending work out. And she complains that finding models is very expensive. And I don't know whether that's because the models are overcharging her or what. It's a big headache. When I find good ones, they fleece me. And at other times, one must suffer their pettiness with the patience of Job. So she's really saying, God, models such a nightmare. Can you imagine it? I love that letter because it really brings to life those sort of little tensions in the workplace and everybody's not really getting on with each other.   And she's fighting off all these people and negotiating very, very hard on one hand to not be ripped off by the models who are cheating her or on the other hand not be ripped off by the clients who think that they can, in one case, she has a client who gets her drawings on spec, has a look and then hires a man to paint them more cheaply, which she's extremely offended by and quite rightly so. But this is the living reality of trying to make a career out of being a professional painter. It isn't always easy. So I think because we're coming into the last few minutes here before when we've got some good questions lined up, it might be good. We didn't get to go through the whole list of things that we said we might cover, but that's fine. What do you think her legacy has been? Certainly in the decades immediately after she died and then up to the present day how that might be changing. Anyone happy just free to go first on that? Catherine, maybe you could start. Well, I mean, I think she is somebody who, I suppose, stands in quite a long tradition of women in the visual arts. And we've started to put some of these women back into art history over the past few decades. So going back into the 16th century to women like Sophie Nisba and Gwisola to Lavinia Fontana, both of whom made very significant careers as portraitists. Platinine Nellie, whose Last Supper has quite recently been uncovered in Florence and is now on display. But I think what she does is that she sort of takes being a woman artist onto a sort of a whole different level. And she says it is possible to sort of be the boss of your own workshop and work on equal terms with men and run a business and actually be really in that top tier. And I think for quite a long time once, when we skip on and get to the point of professional art history getting going in the late 19th century, when the canon is established, she's really sort of fairly minor in it except as a novelty. And gradually she has been put back to what I think is her rightful place in that top tier. But it's taken a very, very long time, a great amount of determined effort on the part of multiple scholars to dig out all the documents, work through all the details, try to piece together which works are hers, finding the documents and so forth. And yeah, so I think the legacy immediately, in the 17th century, is that a woman can do this. And in the longer term, I think it's about trying to recover her place in terms of her significance in the art world. And Bender, you mentioned her kind of maybe picking up the baton from Caravaggio already. What's your kind of feeling about how things have evolved, her legacy? Well, I brought actually two visual aids for this. So the first I have is, this is E.H. Gombrich's story of art and any art history students among them will know about this. And as it says on the front here in the sticker, five million copies sold. And I bought this probably about 20 years ago. So maybe six million now. And this is supposed to be the survey book of art in the world. And there's only one woman mentioned in this, one woman that's extraordinary. And yet my second visual aid. And it's not Artemisia. No, it's not Artemisia. I think my second visual aid is this. This is Petty's dictionary of women artists. Now, there are 21,000 women in here who were working as artists. Now, and so that just gives you an idea of how absurd it is that someone like Caravaggio, sorry, that someone like Artemisia Gentileschi got left out of the earth because she was so good perfecting so many different styles as well. And the names that, sorry, the names of other female artists, because Artemisia wasn't the first. But the names that Catherine also mentioned like Sofany's Bang with Solar, they tended to focus on the genres of art that it was more accepted for them to do. So portraiture still lie, for example. Where Artemisia is so interesting and innovative is that she takes on those big history subjects, the big biblical subjects and no one had ever done that before. And we've gone from the period of Artemisia being entirely forgotten in our history. We are going through, I think we've been through the moment where we see her life story mentioned sort of almost entirely through the story of her rape and subsequent reaction to that. And I think we're now moving through to, I think, the more the best analysis of her legacy, which is that she's the first woman in art history to give us a female take on the major pictorial subjects of her day. And that is something that we should cherish and celebrate. And the most exciting thing, I think, is that because she was forgotten for so long, there is so much more to find out about her. We're finding new works all the time and new letters. And it's just going to get more and more exciting. So, in answering that question, you both have already touched on a couple of the questions I'm seeing coming through, which is asking, who else? Who else? What other women were around at this time? So, we've mentioned a couple. I don't know if you wanted to touch on any others or if I should perhaps move on to a different sort of question in terms of Denzeloski's contemporaries, who was around? Well, yeah, I mean, there are a number of creative women around in Rome at the time, including an architect, Platilla Bricci. There are women working across the visual arts. So, for example, and the arts more generally. So, one of the prominent women who's a contemporary of Artemisius in Venice is a woman called Archangelo Tarabotti, who is very, very famous for writing a virulent attack on the enclosure of unwilling women in convents. This is very common in Venice in this period that women whose families could not afford a dowry for them to marry get pushed into living in convents. Tarabotti hated this, and she wrote a very, very lively treatise on just how dreadful this was. And she's kind of a famous one, but there's a whole literary culture of women writing at this time. Some of Artemisius' history paintings actually draw on theatrical works by women. So, there are actresses like Isabella Andreini. There are women in the opera. You start to get the first women on stage in Venice in the early 17th century singing in Monteverdi's operas, for example. So, this is a very, very lovely time for women across the visual arts, across literature, in music. So, yeah, she's out there, but she's certainly not on her own. She's one of a whole group of people.  Oh, someone managed to see the National Gallery's Artemisia exhibition, which, good on you, and such a shame that, you know, it's not as many people will have seen it, then it could have been in other circumstances. But they said that they noticed that there are quite a few maids in her paintings. They wondered if we had any thoughts about that in terms of her trying to surface women who are often overlooked in society at that time, or if there might be some kind of feminist angle as to why she does that. And you've already mentioned a bit about how this maid is getting out of the killing actions in the Hallifurness painting. So, what are our thoughts there? Well, very sadly, I didn't get to go around the stage, and I've been so looking forward to it, and this cursive pandemic got in the way. And I'm afraid to say that I wouldn't have been able to go around, I wouldn't have been able to make that conclusion. I don't have anything further to add about the maids other than what we already mentioned in the enhanced role of Abra in the duties in the Hallifurness pictures, which of course is a subject that Artemisia paints, I think, six or seven times. And the maid is always there playing a central role. I think this perhaps goes back to, you know, being a woman in a period, part of your job is running the household. That is the traditional woman's role. And if you are running the household, you will know, particularly in this period before labour-saving devices, how important it is to have competent women around you in that kind of middle-class household, to do some of the cooking, to do the laundry, to look after your multiple children while you were trying to do your art.  We mentioned, gosh, it's Elizabeth Serrani. We didn't mention her, but she was painting around the same time. And she's an interesting story in terms of someone who was a breadwinner. She was an artist and a breadwinner and her husband took that role of kind of looking after maybe more of the domestic side of things, which is really interesting. It just came to mind as you mentioned that in terms of flipping traditional roles, if you want to call it that, someone has asked, have things really changed for female artists? I think I'm thinking of the work of the Gorilla Girls and their comments on the art scene today. So art seems actually that much better. You probably need to ask some women artists, but I mean, I guess, certainly in theory, the possibility, you know, there's a sort of equal access to art school and so forth, but you know, I think there is, yeah, I mean, right up and down, if you look at the kind of the work of the kind of avant-garde feminist artists in the 1970s, they're still very much kind of challenging that notion of what a woman's proper role is. Even today, if you look at, I mean, I've personally done the numbers of how many of the works of art is someone like the National Gallery by men and how many by women, but certainly it's not very even proportions. It's not very even proportions in the I think it might be something. No, I was going to say a number, but I don't want to be wrong. I think we're, yeah, we're decidedly under 50, very much so under 50, but I don't know if it's like close to 10 or if it's closer to 50, but yeah, proportionately not as many women. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the thing that strikes me from the life story actually that is that comes across as sadly very, very similar is the questions that are asked about the rape, which is you used to sleep around, didn't you? And all and that kind of allegation is still very, very commonly made in decisions to prosecute or not prosecute today.  That's the modern, the sad modern parallel that strikes me. So, we've got literally a minute left on our time. I wanted to just throw to you guys to see if there's anything that you, you're like, ah, we didn't get to cover it. And you were dying to say regarding Gentileschi. Just, I just, I always teach people to keep their eyes peeled because her of known and accepted works at the moment, I think is not much more than 60. And if you consider that she was a professional artist for more or less the age of 17 until we don't know quite when she died, but you know, many decades of professional artistry. That seems an almost absurdly low number of works, given how successful we know she was and how celebrated we know she was in her lifetime. So keep your eyes particular for her portraits. We have one or two examples of her commission portraits. We know she did them. There's one lovely one of a lady with a fan and it's quite unlike any portrait of a lady paint that a male artist would have painted for the period. She looks like she's swanning into the canvas with some real disco fever beats.  And we know that when she was in London briefly, she also painted portraits of English people here.  We'll find more stuff. When I next get back to No, because I was when I next get back to Italy, I shall start going through those antique shops. Diving through looking for that's a whole Britain's lost masterpieces series for you there looking for the hidden gentiles use across the nation. Well, thank you both so much for your time today and for this great discussion and so much more that can can be gone into. So I hope that curious minds out there will do some digging around and learning more about themselves and thanks to the British Library as well and his best.


bigger emphasis on Corey Kluber this afternoon. He's making just his second start since returning from the injured list. Last time out, he threw 68 pitches. He's not completely stretched out yet. And you'll wonder how far Aaron Boone would push him this afternoon. Aaron Boone did say that they felt as though they saw some good things in that first start against the A's. And I asked Boone, what's an indicator that Corey Kluber is returning to his old form? I think a lot of times the hitters tell you that. You know, movement is such an important part of Corey's success. So the movement quality on his pitches, seeing how guys take pitches against him, seeing some swings against him that maybe you think they have a beat on, but it's just off the barrel or they swing and miss because the breaking ball is sharp or breaking late, things like that. But I think you get a lot of that feedback sometimes from the hitters. And what indication did you see last start that leads you to believe he is working and moving in the right direction towards that? Because I think we saw a lot of that, frankly. And I know he said it and I've said it. He's one hanging breaking ball that was a grand slam that kind of ruined the line and ruined it outing a little bit, but I think there was a lot of good that happened in that outing. He was freezing a lot of guys with some quality breaking balls to different sides of the plate. So I thought it was overall a positive step for him. And hopefully he can go out and take another one today. As far as the Yankees lineup is concerned this afternoon, Gio Urchella is still not in it. But Aaron Boone said he would be an option off the bench. He wanted to give him one more day, likely back in there tomorrow. Domingo Hermann is scheduled to throw a bullpen tomorrow. The Yankees will then reevaluate thereafter. And Luis Severino threw at 120 feet on Friday. He also threw at 120 feet in the outfield this afternoon. He spoke, and he was asked whether or not he thinks he'll make it back this season. And Luis Severino did not seem that sure that that would be the case. He is still optimistic that it might happen. But the fact that he has not yet bob-pitched gotten off a mound, certainly not a good sign for the Yankees. So Hermann, a little bit more likely than Severino, but they are not ruling either of those guys out at this point in time. Just 27 games left in the regular season for the Yankees this year.


Felly, ddod i'n ddweud i'n ddweud i'r unrhyw deall, er mwyn i'n dda ni i eich ddweud i ni'n ddweud i'r unrhyw deall. Felly, dydyn ni'n meddwl i'r gweithio'r cywlau'r cyllid Eleanor, Margaret a Elizabeth yn ddigonwch ei hunain sydd yn ei brydau cwladol yng nghylch yn 14 yma. Maen nhw'n b bubble i gyd yn rhan o'r cymorth o'i groes iawn, felly byddai'n berthynas i'r bwysig o'r organ a'r rhwng. Wrth gwrs, mae'n meddwl i fynd i eu hunain bod hynny'n meddwl i'w chy pause i'ch cyfrwyddwr yn y casodau a'u cyfrwsig, a wedi'i fath de Chylo cyfwyr yn y cwm. Rwy'n meddwl yma fod Edw i'r drwsig o'r hon fain ddechrau yn yn 1307. Mae'r cymdeithas cyngorau yn enw yn rhan o'r holl yng Nghymru. Mae Magna Cata, lle dyn nhw'n iawn gyda'r teimlo bwysig i'r bwysig o'r gwaith a bwysigol rhai. A gael yng Nghymru yn ystyried o'r llwyddiol yn ystyried o'r rhwlaeth a'r rwyd. Yn oedd ymgyrch yn gweithio sydd yn mynd i gael y cymdeithas cyfwysigol, sydd ymgyrch o'r llwyddiol, ddyn nhw'n gwybod yma wedi Gavrston, a Gaskin Night. In 1311, the Barons forced Edward to agree to a number of demands in the ordinances which fundamentally constrained royal power and provided for a greater baronial influence over the realm, as well as exiling peers from the kingdom. The exile and seizure of peers' lands in the Erdyn McCornwall however didn't last for long, but upon his return to the kingdom, Eveston was captured and assassinated by some of the leading nobles of the period. The fallout of this episode, as well as the renewed advancement of unsuitable and unpopular councillors, such as the dispensers, as well as military failures across the border in Scotland, ensured that the struggle between the Barons and King continued until Queen Isabella's invasion and Edward's deposition in 1326 and 1327. Conflict in these years centred around the nature of royal authority, who and what constituted good counsel to the king, and the tensions between loyalty to the crown as an institution and the crown as the power invested within the person of the king himself. His successor, Edward III, was however considered too young at 14 to rule in his own right, so Queen Isabella and her reputed lover, the marcher Lord Roger Mortimer, took control of the kingdom until Edward ousted them in a coup to secure his personal rule in October of 1330. So this period of continual political upheaval obviously required careful navigation by all those within the political community, not least following the outbreak of hostilities and the defeat of the baronial faction at the Battle of Borough Bridge in March 1322. This was especially true of the Declare sisters, whose mother Joan of Acre had been Edward II's sister. Particularly as the death of their only brother Gilbert at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314 meant that they became heiwresins to equal parts of the wealthy erldums of Hartford and Gloucester, as well as to other lordships and lands across the British Isles. As nieces of the king, they operated at the highest level of the aristocracy and brought into perspective marriages a great deal of wealth and influence. The eldest sister, Eleanor, was married to Judas Spencer the Younger in the last year of Edward I reign. For the purposes of this paper, we don't have much evidence of her engagement in politics until the late 1310s, when Hugh and his father very imaginatively also named Hugh became the king's favourites and took an increasing role in the governance of the realm, thus supplanting the traditional claim to the queen in offering counsel to the king. As Queen Isabella's influence with the king reigned, Eleanor began to be seen as fulfilling a role as a quasi-queenly intercessor. We have a letter from Eleanor Declare in February 1323, which you can see in the background here, and which I'm grateful to Paul Driver from the National Archives sending it to me. This was in response to a plea from Joan de Genville, who had been imprisoned following her husband, Roger Mortimer's rebellion. In this letter, Eleanor asked for resistance from the treasurer in obtaining payment to maintain Joan in greater comfort, and we see similar letters where she takes on this role in interceding with the king for people who had personally appealed to her. This change in her public profile coincided with her appearance in the charterie roles as a recipient of a number of lands conversated from dead or imprisoned rebels that were granted to her by the king. Essentially, what we see here is Eleanor occupying the space that was traditionally reserved for a queen. Her extensive gifts of land from the king and her intercession echoed most significant mechanisms through which a married queen could both exercise personal power and influence the politics of time. It's really interesting then that as Queen Isabella's relationship with the king deteriorated and her access to these forms of power declined, there was still this ready-made role at the heart of power for women to moderate the king's actions. I think this says rather a lot about what contemporaries believed women's role in politics was. Her situation, however, changed rapidly with the successful invasion of Queen Isabella and the capture of her husband and father-in-law, as well as a bed with the second in 1326. Following her husband's execution, we know that she was imprisoned in the Tower of London, but it does seem that she was treated fairly leniently with an order made to provide for her reasonable expenses and another order in February 1328, which caused her to be released from captivity alongside her children, household and her goods and chattels. Later in that year, her inheritance in South Wales was returned to her since the king did not, quote, considerate consonant with reason that her land should be deemed forfeited by Hughes forfeiture, end quote. However, in the first parliament of Edward III's majority in November 1330, Eleanor, who had by now, perhaps unwillingly, married William Lizzouche, petitioned that Roger Mortimer had forced her on account of the great covetousness which he had for their lands to give him part of her inheritance to secure her freedom. It isn't particularly clear what this imprisonment, what the cause of this imprisonment was. It may have been an unlicensed marriage between her and William, although there were some allegations of a dual theft, but it's one of these great historical mysteries, I suppose. In this petition to parliament, she echoed the language of Magna Carta, claiming that she was wrongfully imprisoned without charges and cause, and it's probably this link to Magna Carta that influences the success of her petition here. There's clearly a degree of royal sympathy for what she'd been through, with the king claiming that the return of her lands was because his conscience was moved. So as we can see, Eleanor has quite a varied experience, to say the least, of the political world in these years, going from benefiting from the spoils of civil war to being victimised by Roger Mortimer and other nobles who had previously suffered under a second. The middle sister, Margaret, was married to Piers Gaveston in what has been considered a cynical attempt to legitimise the extensive land holdings granted to the king's favourite by way of marriage to a woman of royal blood. The 1311 ordinances demanded Gaveston's exile, and while he did leave the country, he returned very shortly afterwards, probably within about six weeks, to even greater hostility for obvious reasons. We don't see a great deal about Margaret in the political world until she's widowed by Gaveston's assassination in the summer of 1312. Although Gaveston had been restored to his lands at the time of his assassination, Margaret did not receive the third of his lands that she was entitled to as Dower, and that would be for her maintenance as a widow. And which was especially important following the birth of her child with Piers. After her brother Gilbert's death in 1314, she became a prized marital asset with her third of the clare inheritance, and the king secured her as a wife for one of his close confidants, Hugh Ordley, assuming that in doing so, his loyalties would remain to the king. However, her brother-in-law Hugh Disfenson's repeated attempts to gain control over her portion of the clare inheritance served to put an end to Margaret and Hugh Ordley's turn of favour in the King's Circle as the tension mounted between the two Hughes. In 1319, Margaret and Hugh petitioned for the return of lands that Margaret was due as Dower from her marriage to Gabbistan. Their claim was based on the Great Charter, which states that her inheritance and her Dower are to be given to a widow immediately after the death of her husband, and no one's right is to be delayed, and no one is to be ejected from his free tenement without a judgment and decision of the law of the land. Her case relying on Magna Carter was therefore threefold. Not only was it against Article 39 of the Charter to turf her out without legal judgment, and that no one's right should be delayed according to Article 40, but she was also entitled to some form of maintenance during her widowhood under Article 7 of Magna Carter. Ultimately, however, this was rejected by the king on the basis that the ordinances had extinguished Pearson-Margwick's rights in the lands and which Edward claimed had been approved by the Prelates Earl's Barons and the whole community of the realm. It is important to note the contrast between Edward's consistent refusal to accept the ordinances and his reliance on them here as a convenient excuse to punish those who were now politically hostile to him. What is therefore significant about Margaret De Clairs' petition was that it emphasised not only that even when confronted with a firm basis in Magna Carter, the authorities could turn a blind eye if it was not in their interest act and equally that the 1311 ordinances could be subverted from a mechanism which ultimately constrained the king's authority to one which could be weaponised against those who presented opposition. The youngest sister, Elizabeth, is perhaps most interesting to us in an exploration of political culture in this period. She was one of the great dowager ladies of the age and maintained a tight hold over her estates, surviving her siblings and three husbands. Her first two marriages to John de Burr, the son of the Earl of Ulster and Theobald Diverdon, ended in widowhood before conflict once again arose between the crown and Barons towards the end of the 1310s. Following Theobald's death, she was married to Roger Damary who at that point was a close confidant of the king. Just as Margaret's husband Hugh had been. So clearly, Edward had a policy of raising up men through marriage to royal women and bolstering his inner circle in the political world in doing so. Like Hugh Ordling, Roger became estranged from the king as a result of dispensers increasing power and the threat presented to his share of the Clare inheritance, joining the rebel party in the lead up to Barrow Bridge. Whilst Margaret was able to successfully intervene for her husband's life, Roger was condemned to death in the wake of the defeat, but perhaps mercifully succumbed to win sustained whilst fighting. With her husband dead, Elizabeth was in a vulnerable position and was taken from her castle where asked and imprisoned in Barking Abbey alongside her young children. Many of her lands were initially confiscated by the crown, but equally dispenser encouraged further disinheritance to his prophet, forcing her to exchange the prophetable lordship of Usk the Gower and then arranging for William de Breos to fraudulently recover Gower from her, essentially depriving her of any Welsh holdings and what would have been a significant financial asset for her in her widowhood. Elizabeth, however, did not take this lying down and has left behind a really valuable source in the process. Her protest against the dispensers is dated to May of 1326, thus predating Isabella's invasion and the fall of the dispensers. It is a real rarity to see such views expressed whilst the dispensers were still in power and especially detailing how they had co-opted the machinery of government and royal power in order to line their pockets. She too describes her treatment in terms of breaches of Magna Carta regarding her free tenement and that the seizure of her lands was contrary to the law of the land, emphasising how many different legal and lawful attempts she had made to gain back her lands, including the failed introduction of bills in Parliament and the approaches she made to sheriffs to execute rits in her favour. Her protest makes clear her fear for the political community as a whole, the oppression of the good people of the land, but equally the fear that she had for her personal safety and that of her children.  If fear of royal power with the peril that could follow did not stop her and she shares her hopes that the political situation resolves itself and that in the future, race may be more open and the law of the land better maintained and common to all. Eventually, when Edward III came to the throne, she was restored to her full South Wales inheritance and from that point onwards, she became an adept manager of her extensive estates and became one of the great patronesses of the age. So piecing together the stories of these sisters, what might they tell us about political culture in the early 14th century and the role that women might play within it? Firstly, I think we can see just how much ideas stemming from Magna Carta about access to justice and the legal parameters of rule had become integrated into society's understanding of the political world in which they lived. Petitions and protests written by all three sisters refer to clauses of the Great Charter. We know that there was enduring interest in the ideas underpinning the charter with frequent re-issues and at least one surviving Anglo-Norman translation of the charter dating to the reign of Edward I. So this is around the time that the sisters were born. Although there has been debate about the applicability of Magna Carta to women, I think it matters less whether those involved in the original creation of the charter intended to cover women on equal terms as men and far more that subsequent generations believed it did and felt able to use it in defence of their rights. Not only could this be seen as these women using any means necessary to secure the rights they believed had been infringed upon, but we might consider these implications of Magna Carta to be attempts to situate their struggle within a wider political frame. This has the impression of being even more critical about the state of the realm. As Linda Mitchell argued convincingly in her book on Joan de Valence, there was clearly some form of education available to elite women that was designed to prepare them for their careers as wives, mothers and managers. But I think it is perhaps necessary to go even further than this. The Declare sisters lived in exceptional times in which a sound understanding of the social and political developments that the realm had undergone and which continued to influence the relationship between ruler and ruled was critical. A conception of how change in this arena might affect their personal rights would surely be an essential component of their informal training as managers of their estates. I think that women of this significantly elevated status in society would almost certainly have been aware of these broader social and political ideas. Equally, I think we can see how past a powerful women could be carved out by political change, but which seemingly replicated those ideas previously. Eleanor Declare was the prime example of this phenomenon. Even if Queen Isabella had been recognised officially as still acting as queen, it is clear that contemporaries increasingly saw that female power court lay with Eleanor and treated her in a way that replicated the approaches made to queens. Although we can see that Eleanor did try to help the victims of her husband's regime in the aftermath of our bridge, she was still one of the primary beneficiaries of the acquisition of level lands made between 1322 and 1326. Despite trying to ease the burdens of those who had been targeted, perhaps even to the maximum extent of her powers, she was still at least somewhat complicit in the regime that had allowed this to happen. Through exploring the Declare sisters' attempts to right the wrongs, they felt to be perpetrated against them. We can see the many different avenues that were available to those in medieval England. Petitions could be made to both the king personally as well as in open Parliament. In addition to more informal requests made to those who could influence the king, legal statements could be drawn up publicly, bills could be introduced in Parliament and sheriffs influenced to enact wits in favour of the claimant. However, when every part of machinery of government was co-opted by a regime that ignored the law, it is clear that these forms of protest, these forms of making wrongs known to the authorities wouldn't bear fruit. In short, these legal methods only worked when the regime itself worked within the boundaries of the law. To conclude, I hope to have shown just how important it was for aristocratic women to be able to negotiate the changing political landscape as women on their own, perhaps even more so than when they were married. In looking at the Declare sisters as key examples in the reign of Edward II, we can see that medieval women's political careers were closely intertwined with the fortunes of their husbands. Finally, women had sufficient legal and political knowledge to know the routes to address they could pursue, even if an unscrupulous regime blocked them at every turn. Thank you.


Okay, so in this section, we're going to begin by checking for user input. So we're going to just check if the user clicked down, up, left or right. So to do that, we're going to check if type is equal to SDL key down. And if that's the case, we're going to check which key in particular to the user press. Now what we have to do is we have to assign some value to a direction. So let's say if the user clicked left, we want to specify that the snake is moving to the left. If the user clicked right, we're specifying that the snake is moving to the right. And to do that, I think we are going to want to create a direction variable. So up here, I'm just going to implement a direction variable. And then I'm going to create an enum with the different directions. If the down key is pressed, what we're going to do is we're going to set the direction to be down. So we say the IR is equal to down. Then we are just going to check the other cases. Okay, good. So now what's going to happen is if the user clicks down, up, left or right, we are going to set the direction to the respective value of the enum. So next what we have to do is we actually have to move the head. So in which direction is the head of the snake going to move? Now to create the head, or to create the data structure for the head, I'm just going to use SdlRect because SdlRect has an x, y, width and height values. So that can work pretty fine for our purposes for now. So I'm going to declare a new SdlRect and this rect is going to be called head. And we're going to initialize it to be at position 500, 500. Now it's at position 500, 500 because the size of this window is 1,000, 1,000 as you can see up here. So we're going to create a new rectangle with the size 500, 500. And the size of this is going to be 10 by 10. Now this is actually fairly important so make sure that you have a 10 by 10 size for your rect because later on I'm going to do some stuff that is actually going to require you to have a 10 by 10 size. Okay, so now that we have a head, we are actually going to move this around the screen. So still down here, actually now outside of this, what we're going to do is we are going to, okay, so what we're going to do here is we are going to check in which direction we are moving. So we're going to do a switch statement and then we're going to switch on the direction. Now we're going to have a couple of cases. So the first case is if we are moving down, we are going to increase Y by 10. Okay, so now that we have basic movement implemented in this game. Whoops, I should have put this here. Okay, so now that we have this basic stuff in the game, what we're going to do is we actually are going to draw the body. And to draw the body, as you would know in STL, you first have to set the color that you want to draw with.  So in this case, we're going to draw like this. Okay, so now that we have that finished, what we're going to do is we're going to compile this and see what we get. Okay, as you can see, I have a square on the window, the square is moving around. When I click up down left or right, it moves in the direction that I specified. Okay, so now that we have the basics out of the way, let's actually begin writing our program. Now we're going to need a couple of libraries and I'm going to include three of them. I'm going to include Vector, we're going to include Algorithm and I'm going to include DQ. So I'm going to explain why we're going to need these later, but for now, just make sure you have them included. Okay, so what we need now is we need a container that's going to store our snake. So our snake, let's kind of think about it. What does a snake game entail? What is a snake game? So a snake game, let's say, let me just like draw it kind of crudely here. Okay, so let's say we have snake, right? And we have a little snake, let's just say this is a snake. So in snake what we do is we constantly remove something from the end and then add it to the front. So let's say at the end we remove one of these symbols and then in the front we add it here. So that's like a single instance of the snake moving forward. So let's say another instance is it moves forward again, right? And then occasionally it runs into an apple and then when it runs into an apple, what it's going to do is it's going to grow. So we just need to add another one and then leave this as it is. So to do this kind of thing, I think the best container to hold a data structure like that would be a DQ. The reason why DQ is really good for this is because a DQ you are able to push from the front, pop from the front, push from the end and pop from the end. So I think this is really good because doubly ended Q, it lets you delete from the front, delete from the end, it lets you add from the end and add from the front. And that's why we are going to make, that's why we're going to make the entire body of the snake. We're going to make this doubly ended Q container. So this container is going to be doubly ended Q for the snake body. And we're going to keep the head for now, but what we have to do here is we have to add the snake body container. And we're going to call this, I'm going to call this, I'm not sure what to call it. Just say STD and we're going to say DQ. And this DQ is going to be, it's going to be composed of STL rects. So we're going to have a bunch of STL rects and these rects are going to be called RQ, rect Q. I think that's a good idea. Let's just call this RQ. And I think we should also include, so the game world is also going to need apples. So because it's going to need apples, I think we should create a new container and this container is going to be used for apples. And I'm fresh out of ideas. So you can basically use anything you want. I'm just going to use Vector because I always use Vector for just the general containers. And this is also going to be an STL rect container. So we're going to contain STL rects in this one. Okay, so now that we have that, we actually want to populate the game world with a bunch of apples. And here we're going to just generate a whole bunch of apples at random positions on the screen. And yeah, so we're just going to make a whole bunch of apples here outside of the main loop. Make sure it's outside of the main loop. You don't want to keep adding apples to the screen every single iteration. And here we are going to decide how many apples do we want. So let's just keep it simple. We're going to have 100 apples at one time. And then we are going to increase i by 1. We don't really use this variable. So all we are doing here is just iterating 100 times. And for every time we iterate, we're going to add a new apple to the screen at a random position. And what I'm going to do here is I'm going to do a modulus 100 and then I'm going to multiply it by 10. I want every apple to be in a location that's divisible by 10 and I'm going to explain why a little bit later. Then we have to set the size of these apples and we're just going to set the size to be 10 and at the same as the head. So the head and the apples can be the same size. And I think that should be enough. So we drew all of our apples. Or should I say we added all the apples to the game world. So all the apples are now in the apples vector. So next what we want to do is we want to specify the size of our snake. So how big is our snake right now? And we specify the size like this. So it's going to be pretty simple. I should actually define it here. So the size of our snake is going to be, not SDD. So the size of our snake is going to be just called size. So int size is equal to one. So I'm going to say the size of the snake is one. And yeah, when you start the game your size is going to be one usually. Okay, so that's enough for the setup. So basically what we're doing for the setup is we're creating a DQ. We're creating an apples vector. And then we're creating a bunch of apples for the snake to move around and eat. Now what we have to do is we have to do some collision detection. So there are two stages for collision detection is one, we want to check the collision between apple and the snake. And another collision detection we want to do is we want to do the collision detection between the snake and itself. So is the snake, is the head of the snake touching its own body? And if it is, we're just going to set the size to one again. So kind of like indicating that you have to start over. And we're going to do our collision detection here. So we're going to say collision detection. And the first thing we're going to do is we are going to check the collision between the apple and the head of the snake. So actually, before I do that, let me see if I include it. Yeah, I include algorithms. So I'm going to use a couple of algorithms in this example. So what we're going to do is we're going to say STD for each. And then we are going to pass in a begin. We're going to pass in apples.begin. And what I'm doing here is I'm just going to specify the iterator. That's the beginning of the apple. And then the iterator, that's the end of the apples container. And then what we have to do here is we have to pass in a lambda expression. So this lambda expression is just going to, it's basically, what it's going to do is it's going to, how should I put it? It's going to do the collision detection. So it's going to check if the collision happened. And if it happened, we're going to do something. Okay, so what we're going to do here is we are going to check if the head is touching any of the apples. So what's going to happen is this E variable, it's going to be each of the apples on the screen. So it's going to go for each apple, or maybe I should just call this apples, or apple. That should be a little bit easier to understand. So what's going to happen is we're going to check the collision between the apple and the head of the snake. We're going to check every single apple against the snake. So let's do that. Okay, so here we are going to check the collision and we're going to say if head.x is equal to apple.x and then we are going to say and head.y is equal to apple.y. Okay, so what happens when the snake eats the apple? Well, what happens when the snake eats the apple is the apple gets removed from the scene and what we do is we increase the size of the snake. So because of that, we're going to say size plus equals 10. Don't forget we define size up here and the original size is one. So what happens is every time the snake eats an apple, we're going to increase its size by 10. You can adjust this however you want. And to remove the apple from the scene, we're not going to do anything fancy here. I'm just going to move it off the screen so that the snake can't see it. Okay, so I'm going to say apple.x is equal to negative 10 and apple.y is equal to negative 10. Okay, that's good. So here this is our collision. Collision detection with apple. Okay, next, we have to do our collision detection with itself. So did the snake touch itself? And if it touched itself, what do we do? How do we handle that? And here we're going to say... Okay, so here what we're going to do is we are going to do another four each, so STD or each. And then we're going to pass in the beginning and the end of our queue. And here we are going to pass in another lambo expression and this lambo expression is going to be specific for the body of the snake. Okay, now we're going to do head.x is equal to e.snakesegment.x and head.y is equal to snakesegment.y. Okay, so what do we do if the snake head touches the snake body? Well, I think the easiest thing to do here is just say, okay, so if the snake touches its own body, we're just going to set the size to one. So kind of like reset the snake. We're just going to reset the snake to its original state. And here what we're going to do is we are going to push... we're going to push the head because as you can see, every single iteration of this loop, every single iteration of the game loop, what we're doing is we're adding 10 to the head or like we're either adding 10 to the head or subtracting 10 from the head. And what we're going to do here is we're going to put the newest version of the head to the front of this queue. So to do that, we're just going to say rq.pushfront and then we're going to push the head. So we're going to push to the front of the snake a new head. And then to make sure that the snake is shrinking at the end, what we're going to do is we are going to pop the last item from this queue. So we're going to do it like this. So here what we're going to do is we're going to check if rq, the size of rq is exceeding the size that's specified by the game. So for example, let's see. So this size here in size, if this size is smaller than rq, then we have to remove items from the end of the snake until it gets to the size that's appropriate for the rules of the game. So for example, here we added a new head to this snake. So because we added a new head to the snake, we also have to pop the tail from the snake. And to do that, we're going to use a while loop because we can also set the size to 1 here. So for example, if the snake's size was 99, then it touched its own tail and its tail got set to 1. What we have to do is we have to remove all of the segments so that it goes from 99 to 1. And to do that, we're just going to do while rq.size is greater than size. So if the size of this q is larger than the size that's specified by the game, what we're going to do is we're going to say rq.pop back. So we're going to remove the last element from the snake until it complies with the size that we specify. So what's next? What's next is we're going to draw the body. So we're going to draw the body of the snake. So to draw the body, I'm just going to modify this here. So here all I'm doing is I'm drawing the head. But what we want to do now is we want to draw the whole body. And to draw the whole body, I'm just going to do another 4 each. So I'm going to say std or each. rq.begin. Then I'm going to say rq.end. And then we're going to do another lambda expression here. And this lambda expression, I don't think you need to trap anything here. So I'm just going to leave it as it is. Auto. And then we're going to say snake segment. Okay. So here what we're going to do is we are going to fill a rect for each snake's act. And the fill a rect is just the STL's way of drawing to the screen. So fill a rect, basically just draw a rectangle specified that you're going to pass in. So what we're going to do is we're going to pass in a renderer. Actually, I do need to trap something. I need the renderer. So we're going to say renderer. And then we are going to pass in the snake segment, which is an STL of rect, I believe. Okay. And we don't need this anymore. It's going to delete, actually. Okay. I think that's, I think that's, that's pretty much it. So this is about 130 lines of code. And let's see if it works. I hope this works. Okay. So g plus plus. And then we're going to specify the snake. Actually, I'm on STL2. I think the STD, C plus plus 20. I think I need that. Oh, snake. Oh, okay. Okay. We forgot to draw the apples. So let's go back in here.  So to draw the apples, we're basically going to do the same thing, except this time, I think we should just set the color to be red because apples are red. Okay. Let's compile that again and let's run it. Okay. So as you can see, I'm grabbing the apples. Every time I collide with the apple, it disappears. And I grow by 10, by 10, not pixels, but 10 times 10 pixels. So, and if I collide with myself, I become, I just reset the game. I'll not reset the game, but I reset the size of the snake. There you go. That's a snake game.


So, today we are going to do a new program called Agri-Entrepreneurship, Agri-Indian Registration, which is based on the ecosystem and further development of the Agri-Entrepreneurship project. This project is based on the Indian Council of Agri-Entrepreneurship, the new Agri-Entrepreneurship is based on the Agri-Entrepreneurship project. So today we are going to do a new program called Agri-Entrepreneurship, Agri-Entrepreneurship The problem is, who is developing further, who is doing the research, who is doing the detailed discussion. We want to do a lot of things with the farmers everywhere. But for them, we give them awards. After that, no one makes them an agri-pruner. We want to give them businessmen. We want farmers who are with the 9th generation to be the agri-pruner. We give them technology. But we know that the books are read by the farmers. We want to know a lot from the farmers. That is our wish. And what is there? The farmers who are in the 9th generation, they are bankers. The ones who will be used for them, we want to bring them forward. We want to do more agri-pruner research. We want to talk about the idea of cultural practices. We want to do more agri-pruner research on the objective of farmers. We are going to come up with new policies for the future of the economy. We are going to do more agri-pruner research on the objective of farmers. both for the customer and for the organization. So, it is a very important thing to do.  So, it is a very important thing to do. Now, this is a very important thing to do. I will talk about it in a little bit. I will discuss it in a little bit, but see, I will be showing you in a little bit. I share the name, the surname, the name of that, and we will research it as the different ecosystem. Anything that happens here in the Karmasad, in the Karmasad, whatever happens here, we, for the police officers, whether we have talent, whether we have the support, we are in a good ecosystem. There is no environment. No training. No security, no training and no opportunities. I will say environment, let's say, we have a good environment We are a family. We have a lot of work to do. We are an expert in all sectors of the country. We are very interested in this. If you like our video, don't forget to like, share and subscribe to our channel.