In the photo, it mentions that “Just three weeks after British soldiers shot and killed five Bostonians and wounded six others, the silversmith and patriot Paul Revere produced this engraving, which depicts the British massacring peaceful colonists in cold blood.” The leader of the British troops is Thomas Preston. There’s always two sides to every story. Listening to Theodore Bliss, He was on the Patriots side. Theodore said he saw the patriots throw a couple of snow balls first. A couple of them hit the soldiers, then before the patriots knew it, the Soldiers started to fire. Theodore says he didn’t hear the captain say to fire when shots were fired. He was uncertain, soldiers and patriots were saying it, and Theodore could differentiate who was saying what. But Theodore doesn’t know whether it came from the captain or not. There were about a hundred of people
The Boston Massacre is one of the most controversial events in American history that occurred in Boston before the American Revolution. Certainly, it has a fundamental role in the development of America as a nation, which led it to have a huge motivation for revolution. A heavy British military presence and having very high taxes in the country were some of the main reasons that made Boston citizens very irritated. Thus, there were already many disagreements and tensions between inhabitants and the British that could have led to the Massacre. In this essay, I will carefully analyze three primary sources, and compare these to the interpretation given by HBO’s John Adams. In my view, these sources can be
During the night of March 5, 1770, colonists gathered outside the Boston Customs House. As the crowd grew bigger, colonists started to throw “snowballs, oyster shells, and chunks of ice” at the soldiers. The soldiers panicked and fired at the colonists causing the death of five colonists and ten injured men. I believe that the cause of the Boston Massacre was due to the British. The reason why I blame the British is because, the British soldiers could have handled the situation, made unnecessary actions, and made the colonists angry with taxes and the Quartering act.
The colonist are at fault for the Boston Massacre because they were taunting the soldiers. For example according to Newton Prince an eyewitness, he said that he heard the colonist were calling the soldiers lobsters and
Many events in history have been called “massacres”. They often resulted in hundreds of deaths, such as the slaughter of natives that came with the colonization of the Americas. Yet one of the most famous and significant massacres in American history resulted in only a handful of deaths. On May fifth, 1775, a mob of colonists attacked a patrol of nine British soldiers, who then fired upon the mob. Five colonists were killed, and six others injured (“Boston Massacre”). Preserved in an engraving by Paul Revere, these deaths became a rallying cry of rebellion for the American colonists. The event came to be known as the Boston Massacre. The Boston Massacre was a turning point in the colonists’ rebellion against Britain. This crucial event
On the cold and snowy night of March 5, 1770, rioters marched down King Street in Boston, breaking the usual silence. In front of the customs office, the violent rioters were met by five British soldiers and their commanding officer. They immediately began haranguing the soldiers. During the ensuing chaos, the soldiers, who had been bombarded by stones and balls of ice, were becoming anxious as they waited for commands from their superiors. However, the soldiers panicked when they heard, through the yells of the rioters, the word “Fire!”. Upon hearing that word, the soldiers opened fire on the crowd with their muskets. “Shouts and curses filled the air.” (pg. 206). Five rioters were swiftly killed.This was the infamous Boston Massacre- An event that shaped U.S. history and fed the growing flames of revolution among the British colonists in America. After the massacre, the outraged people of Boston called for a trial. Defending the soldiers was renowned lawyer and future president John Adams, who believed that everyone should be granted a fair trial. With the help of Mr. Adams, the soldiers were determined to achieve victory. Through months of thought and many struggles, they succeeded. As punishment, the soldiers were branded and sent back to England, but
"I heard the word fire and took it and am certain that it came from behind the Soldiers. I saw a man passing busily behind who I took to be an Officer. The firing was a little time after. I saw some persons fall. Before the firing I saw a stick thrown at the Soldiers. The word fire I took to be a word of Command. I had in my hand a highland broad Sword which I brought from home. Upon my coming out I was told it was a wrangle between the Soldiers and people, upon that I went back and got my Sword,” said Benjamin Burdick. This account shows the confusion that was ever-present during the Boston massacre. It also shows that the colonists and the soldiers may have been equally violent during the Boston Massacre.
In the fifth grade we were first introduced to the Boston Massacre as a bloody tragedy caused by British Soldiers, and this is exactly what the delegates wanted it to be seen it as. In the engraving entitled ( “Bloody Massacre,” by Paul Revere), the author depicts the Boston Massacre as a one sided bloody offense. In reality the Boston Massacre was controlled by the furious mob of colonists who decided to provoke the soldiers by bombarding them with projectiles. With their lives at risk the soldiers merely just defended themselves from the dangersome mob, Revere fails to depict this part of the story because of the fact that many would have sided with the soldiers and would have claimed his argument invalid. Further examples of
On March 5 1770, a union of colonists gathered at the Customs House where they protested and harassed soldiers standing outside. These colonists were representing The Sons of Liberty, a secret organization aiming to rebel against the British Parliament. There was an abundance of tension between the colonists and Great Britain after new taxes were passed and British troops arrived in Massachusetts to enforce them. After many hours of chanting and protesting a shot was fired; the atrocious event left five men dead. The question society still ponders over 200 years later is what really happened and whose fault was it? The Boston Massacre initiated because of miscommunication; it was not a massacre but a mutual riot.
After the French and Indian War, tension was increasing in the English Colonies due to over taxation laws. In March of 1770, hatred between the colonists and the British soldiers erupted into fighting in an event known as the Boston Massacre. The Boston Massacre was a significant event in the American Independence movement. The source of the conflict with the British troops and the Bostonians was the Townshend Act in 1767, three years prior to the massacre. The primary sources in this collection of documents are of different accounts of the massacre: a pamphlet of the testimony of William Wyatt, an article from the Boston Gazette and Country Journal, a sketch by Paul Revere, an account of Captain Thomas Preston, and a court case from John Adams. These documents expose the turmoil of that day from different perspectives of Bostonians and British soldiers. They also show how some colonial leaders used this event to advance the patriot cause. The account of Captain Thomas Preston said that he tried to
On March 5, 1770...The Boston Massacre, known as the Incident on King Street by the British, was an incident on March 5, 1770, in which British Army soldiers shot and killed people while under attack by a lot of colonists. There was not a massacre on March 5, 1770 in Boston because. According to the sources B,C and D say that the colonists had weapons and they were also attacking in the massacre. The evidence that supports my claims is that in documents B,C,D the colonists are clearly seen with weapons according to the documents with the gazette, it said that the colonists had weapons and were involved in the fight. This supports my own opinion because in document b the colonists are seen with some type of sword or golf club. My second reason
I am writing to express my opinion about the events that occurred March 5, 1770 in Boston. I feel very strongly that the blame rests solely on the nine British soldiers that fought in the massacre. These soldiers were much to harsh to the colonists were involved in this fight, and had no right to fire a gun at these innocent colonists trying to stand up for their rights of privacy, as well as just rights in general. I believe that the world should know what really happened on March 5, 1770 in the streets of Boston. I hope that you should continue reading to find out more.
“Between the hours of nine and ten o’clock, being in my master’s house, was alarmed by the cry of fire, I ran down as far as the town-house, and then heard that the soldiers and the inhabitants were fighting in the alley… I then left them and went to King street. I then saw a party of soldiers loading their muskets about the Custom house door, after which they all shouldered. I heard some of the inhabitants cry out, “heave no snow balls”, others cried “they dare not fire”. The Boston massacre has been no massacre it was propaganda. The incident that happened March 5th, 1770 in the streets of Boston only killed five people and had six people with non fatal injuries. There were
Paul Revere’s “The Bloody Massacre in King-Street, March 5, 1770.” is a painting of the Boston Massacre that still represents the bloody event today. However, is this depiction an observation of oppression or propaganda with a platform? The painting depicts the British Red Coats firing on the civilians of Boston as if it was a battlefield with the unarmed citizens pleading for mercy. On the contrary, according to History.com, “A squad of British soldiers, come to support a sentry who was being pressed by a heckling, snowballing crowd, let loose a volley of shots. Three persons were killed immediately and two died later of their wounds; among the victims was Crispus Attucks, a man of black or Indian parentage.” Since this gruesome event was one of the sparks of passion that started the fires of the American Revolution, it is possible that Paul Revere could have employed this work of art to motivate an uprising. Revere uses the facial expression of the British soldiers and civilians, the Catholic church, and strategic placement to manipulate the reader or viewer’s emotions to persuade him or her that this event was a demonstration of the British blatantly oppressing and betraying the colonists.
Similar to the way that the colonial and British perspectives greatly varied for the Boston Massacre, their opinions are once again vastly different for the Battles of Lexington and Concord. In this event as well, both parties attempt to place the blame on the other which is not unusual due the nature of the sources. However, this highlights the large amount of bias evident in all of the accounts. For the colonial perspective, there are two statements, each from a member of a colonial militia that fought during the Battles of Lexington and Concord. Both of these sources place the blame on the British soldiers and claim that the British fired first, killing several colonists. One account, from the Battle of North Bridge, claims that the colonists were ordered to hold their fire and that they didn’t fire until the British opened fire upon them. The other account, from soldier who fought during the skirmish at the Lexington Green, states that the colonists did not even get a single shot off, at least not before the soldier whose account this is was wounded. This source also claims that the British commanding officers were yelling at and insulting the colonists as their ranks closed on the milita. Both these sources are very similar to the colonial perspectives of the Boston Massacre because they all place the blame on the British soldiers and attempt to make themselves appear as the victims.