The Minutemen And Their World Analysis

Why do people associate wealth with good leadership abilities? That is the main question that was lingering in my mind while I was read “The Minutemen and their World,” book by Robert Gross. The book is about a town called Concord (which is in Massachusetts). The books tells about how the city of Concord was before the Revolutionary war, during the Revolutionary war and after the revolutionary war. In this book, it shows how leaders come about and how they impact their society around them. After reading this book, it made me think about how wealthy people are always seen as leaders? Becoming wealthy in American can be a daunting task to complete. It requires a variety of different skills to make a profitable business. But does creating a lucrative business for personal gain, merits you to being a leader over the masses of common people? We currently have this exact situation playing out before our eyes with GOP candidate Donald Trump. Donald Trump doesn’t have any previous experience in political affairs, but he is currently leading

Upon landing on the beach of Plymouth aboard the Mayflower in 1620, our ancestors were quick to form the Mayflower Compact, a document of self-government. Now on the Twenty-Third of March, 1775, Patrick Henry has lead the cry for sovereignty and for war against Britain. Many of us now are divided over a controversy that has left us skeptical of our fellow colonist. The congressmen in Richmond, Virginia have heard Henry’s exclamation, as he spoke of freedom from Britain and the need for war. Henry argues that the British are preparing for war, that our peace agreements have been in vain, and it's our duty to fight for the noble cause of liberty. So let us not extenuate the matter any further and rather discuss the means in which we strive to free ourselves from the grasp of the Parliament. The time is upon us to take action, because if we are to fight in order to keep our freedom and prosperity, is there really anything else to lose. While the thought of war is inconceivable, we will no longer stand the despotic and oppressive ways of the

This book, “The Shoemaker and The Tea Party” is split into two different sections. The first part is about the events that happened in Boston through the eyes of George Robert Twelves Hewes. The second part is written about the Author, Alfred Young, who asks the question “When Did They Start Calling It the Boston Tea Party”. This book is written about the memory that Hewes had of the many events that he participated in. These events included the Boston Massacre, The Boston Tea Party, and the tarring and feathering of people. The recollections of Hewes helped Americans to realize that we are all equal, and all capable of doing great things to help our country.

In Thoreau’s continuing effort to describe the context for citizen rebellion, he beseeches how irrelevant public opinion is if it is not acted on. “How can a man be satisfied to entertain an opinion merely, and enjoy it? Is there any enjoyment in it, if his opinion is that he is aggrieved?” (Thoreau). This question develops a sense of urgency that unless an opinion is acted on, first, there will be a complete absence of realistic results, but second, it simply exacerbates the issue that citizen opinion is against. To an extent, opinions are worthless if there is no motivation behind them, and Thoreau makes this very clear within his essay to assist the exigence behind his straightforward tone.

Robert A. Gross the author of “The Minutemen and their World” gives a very detailed nonfictional narrative of the small town of Concord, Massauchessets. Gross describes the American Revelotion through the eyes of this community which paints a more vivid picture of the events taking place up to the war which seperated the Unite States for Great Britian through a perspective that I have never seen before.

When we start analyzing the data we find that living in the colonies following the Boston Tea party was a difficult time for many. There were people on both sides, those who were against the act and those who were for the act and a fight against Britain. When asked by the authorities, no one would release the names of the perpetrators of the Boston Tea Party for fear of backlash. Those who were against the act also feared from those who were now actively seeking to fight against the British. “The mob held no dissent, burning homes of the most outspoken opponents and sending the dreaded tumbrel, an imitation of the Inquisition leading to the doors of citizens who dared voice support for the established government” (Unger 3). This shows a clear example of how many there were who were opposed to the actions of the rebels, yet at the same time they could not speak out in fear for their homes and families. It continues with, “Whatever the motives of the

In the book “Shays’ Rebellion: Authority and Distress in Post-revolutionary America”, Sean Condon shows us his outlook on how he saw post-revolutionary America to be within the late 1770’s and 1780’s. This book was released in 2015 by John Hopkins University Press, and was also made in a continuing book series by Peter Charles Hoffer and Willamjames Hull Hofer called Witness to History. The story takes us "Throughout the late summer and fall of 1786, farmers in central and western Massachusetts organized themselves into armed groups to protest against established authority and aggressive creditors. Calling themselves "regulators" or the "voice of the people.”” [1] Condon succeeds by prosing an appealing idea in an upfront style that shapes

On 19 April 1775, the battle begun. The colony protected by local militiamen was vastly outnumbered, armed with only 77 men including “minutemen,” named for their ability to be ready to fight in a minute’s notice were

Francis Parkman Analyzes the "Conflict (1884) 108 C. A New Restlessness 220 1. Andrew Burnaby Scoffs at Colonial Unity (1760) 110 2. A Lawyer Denounces Search Warrants (1761) 212ViU Contents 7 8 The Road to Revolution, 1763

When colonists were required to actually start paying their taxes to Britain, they became outraged causing Parliament to repeal the Sugar Act. Additionally, the Stamp Act was the first direct tax on the colonists. By requiring a tax to be paid on nearly every colonial document, colonists could not bear the oppressive Stamp Act. This act was also het with heavy opposition and it would set the volatile scene for Britain’s next laws and acts that would ignite “The Boston Massacre.” The most prominent taxes that were placed on the colonists right before “The Boston Massacre” were the Townshend Duties. This law taxed paper, lead, paint glass and tea. Colonists were furious with Britain’s various taxes, provoking boycotts and high tensions. (Arrison) With opposition increasing in the colonies, the British Parliament felt it was necessary to place British soldiers on watch in the colonies under the Quartering Act. However, the soldiers’ presence was not the only annoyance the colonists would have to suffer. The colonists were responsible for providing for the soldiers’ necessities. This included providing shelter that in most cases was shared between the colonists and the soldiers. Most notably, the soldiers were often unruly, drunk, and pugnacious and treated as low-paid civilian servants. (Gilje) Personally, if I was a colonist forced to surrender my own space for disrespectful

The Tea Party and The American Revolution shaped the colonists in way that brought them together. Such as when Hewes had that small confrontation with John Malcom , “ with these and such like arguments, together with a gentle crouding of persons not of their way of thinking out of the ring they proceeded to elevate Mr. Malcom from his sled into an art , and stripping him to buff and breeches , gave him a modern jacket and tied him away to liberty -tree , where they proposed to him to renounce his present commission , and swear that he would never hold another inconsistent with the liberties of his country …..”, (Young, 49). These events transformed Hewes into a person he couldn’t even imagine, “He turned out because of a sense of kinship with “his townsmen” in danger; he stood his ground in defense of his “rights”; he was among the “people” who delegated a committee to act on their behalf; he took part in the legal process by giving a deposition, by attending the trials, and as he remembered it, by testifying. In sum, he had become a citizen, a political man “, (Young,41).

Thomas Hutchinson, chief justice and lieutenant governor of Massachusetts, despite his goal to prevent passage of the dreaded Stamp Act, was violently hated by the people of Boston. In the middle of dinner on August 26, 1765, the most violent mob in the history of America attacked the mansion of Governor Hutchinson. If he and his family had not fled the table and escaped their home, they might not have lived through the ordeal. But, why would an angry Boston mob ransack the home of man who wanted to better the lives of the people?

In one of the three town meetings in Berkshire County which John Ashley represented, Ashley was denounced for being against the “highly approved circular letter” (Swan). Even though he was denounced, in the next election, he was chosen again to represent the area. In early 1773, Bett was serving refreshments to a dozen white men that had gathered at the Ashley’s house to draw up a petition to “take into consideration the grievances which Americans in general and Inhabitants of this Province in particular labor under” (Swan). Ashley, who was chairman at this meeting, set up a set of resolutions, which the first read “Resolved, That mankind in a state of nature are equal, free, and independent of each other, and have a right to the undisturbed enjoyment of their lives, their liberty, and property” (Rawls, pg. 188). This meeting was well noted by Bett.

“Is there a single trait of resemblance between those few towns and a great and growing people spread over a vast quarter of the globe, separated by a mighty ocean?” This question posed by Edmund Burke was in the hearts of nearly every colonist before the colonies gained their independence from Britain. The colonists’ heritage was largely British, as was their outlook on a great array of subjects; however, the position and prejudices they held concerning their independence were comprised entirely from American ingenuity. This identity crisis of these “British Americans” played an enormous role in the colonists’ battle for independence, and paved the road to revolution.

It is easy to interpret the American Revolution simply as a struggle for freedom. The magnanimous phrases of the Declaration of Independence have embedded in our hearts and minds glorious images of the Founding Fathers fighting for the natural rights of man. The American Revolution, however, also had a darker side to it, the side of self-interest and profit. The signers of the Declaration represented various classes – the working class, the wealthy land owners and merchants, the intellectuals, and the social elite. Each of these strata had its own set of expectations and fears, which lent a new dimension to the cause of the Revolution. The pressure of these internal, and often overlapping groups, combined with the oppressive external