Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Historical writings about the boston massacre
Sources for the boston massacre
History outline for boston massacre paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Boston Massacre
The events of March 5, 1770 should and have been remembered as momentous and predictable. Perhaps not the night or city specifically, but the state of affairs in Boston, if not throughout The English Colonies, had declined to the point that British troops found themselves frequently assaulted with stones, dirt, and human feces. The opinions and sentiments of either side were certainly not clandestine. Even though two spectators express clear culpability for the opposing side, they do so only in alteration of detail. The particulars of the event unfold the same nonetheless. The happening at the Custom House off King Street was a catastrophic inevitability. Documents from the Boston Massacre trial, which aid us in observing from totally different perceptions. The depositions of witnesses of the event prove to be useful; an English officer Captain Preston and a colonial Robert Goddard give relatively dissimilar details. In spite of these differences, they still both describe the same state of affairs.
First we will touch on the deposition of Theodore Bliss, a local colonist. In Mr. Bliss’s deposition he states the colonists were provoking the soldiers. The colonists were throwing snowballs and yelling aggravating words at them. According to Mr. Bliss it was not until a soldier was struck with a stick that the first fire was shot. The deposition state that the order to fire was not given by Captain Preston. After the first shot was fired Mr. Bliss thinks the captain gave the order to fire but is not sure due to the fact a lot of people were yelling at the soldiers to fire. Claims none of the colonists charged at the soldiers prior to the first shot, but that after the first shot a couple of the colonists attempted to ...
... middle of paper ...
...r weapons the men stated they thought the Captain had ordered it, but Captain Preston assured them he had not.
My original thoughts on the Boston Massacre were that the name rang true. I based these thoughts solely on the idea that no matter how colonist act, the military should never use excessive force in maintaining the peace. During my closer review of the actual event I have come to believe this has been given the name massacre in error. When you look at all of the depositions together and then start to take out the differences you will notice that everyone account of the event is nearly the same. The differences that are evident during the trial have been made by biased opinions and propaganda to promote the release of British troops from Boston. Although the ruling may not have been just, it served its purpose and drew the troops away from Boston in the end.
The Shoemaker and the Tea Party examines three main events, The American Revolution, The Boston Massacre, and the Boston Tea Party, and in which ways they are shaped as memories over time. Within the chapter labeled “Taming the Memory of the Revolution, 1783-1820,” Young goes on to discuss what it takes for an event to pass into a public memory. During the time of the American Revolution, so many negative events happened that many Americans did not want to past as memories, such as the Boston Massacre. Young makes a point that instead of remembering all of the negative events that happened, “exchange that Anniversary for Another,” (Young, 1999, 108). With that being said, The Boston Massacre happened on March 5, 1770, while the Declaration of Independence was adopted into Congress July 4, 1776 – the Fourth of July overshadowed March 5th,
...itish government. In Boston, the site of a bloody confrontation between British redcoats and Americans citizens less than 10 years before, emotions ran high. Boston was a center of agitation and finally on the night of December 16,1773, the course of world history was changed. A revolutionary event was on the horizon. As once patriot mournfully observed, “Our cause is righteous and I have no doubt of final success. But I see our generation, and perhaps out whole land, drown in blood.” (Liberty, 2) The rest is history.
On the morning of the Ludlow Massacre, explosions were set off by the National Guard around 9 o’clock and certain panic ensued. Women and children ran from their tents to the arroyo outside of the town. An exchange of fire began between strikers and guardsmen and continued until around 5 o’clock when the guardsmen began looting striker’s tents and setting them on fire. Twenty lives were lost including two of the striker’s wives and eleven children, but only one of these lives belonged to the National Guard. With this in mind, it can be debated whether or not this event should be considered a battle or a massacre. Some have argued that, because of the striker’s retaliation, the event should be considered battle, but because of previous abuse and the guard’s disregard for who they were firing at it and careless destruction, it should be considered a
For my whole life, I have lived in Boston. In 1773, me and some others went on to the British’s ship to protest. We threw 342 chests of tea into the Ocean. This had caused the Boston Tea Party. As I am serving in the war, young women at home are crushing on British soldiers, only for their handsomeness and red fancy coats. At one point Washington’s position was uncertain. Valley Forge was located about 18
In the world’s lens during the 1760s, the British empire had a clear and prominent control over the colonies. However, by the mid-1770s the Americans became enraged enough to declare war against the British for independence. Due to Britain’s massive imperial presence around the globe, the British civilians had a strong inclination for a successful outcome. Instead, the colonists pulled a surprising victory from what should have been a swift defeat. While the British had an abundance of advantages, they lost the Revolutionary War because the British army underestimated the colonists’ perseverance for freedom.
“.the frightened soldiers fired into the crowd.” (Doc 3). As a result of this incident, three people were killed on the scene and two were mortally wounded. The soldiers were also ordered not to fire. The colonists did not think that they should have been shot at or killed, this infuriated them.
On March 5, 1770 the dreadful day came. A mob of people went in front of the Customs Office in Boston Massachusetts and started to throw stuff and give insults at the soldiers. As a result to this so-called harassment the soldiers fired on the crowd. The first to die was a black man named Crispus Attucks. He was a native of Frainghan, Massachusetts. He escaped from slavery in 1750 and had become a sailor. Crispus Attucks is considered the first martyr of the American Independence (Mahin 1). The four others who died were Samuel gray, a rope maker; James Caldwell, a sailor; Samuel Maverick, a seventeen year old apprentice and Patrick Carr, a leather worker and Irish immigrant. All in which were unarmed and brutally murdered. The soldiers killed three, mortally wounded two others, and wounded six. How much ha...
Imagine a powerful organization from a different place coming into your town taking your jobs, destroying your possessions and telling you what you can and can't do. This is what the British were doing to the colonists during the time of the Boston massacre. The Boston Massacre was a conflict that happened on March 5th 1770. It happened near the courthouse in front of the church on a street called King Street. British soldiers had shot at a group of colonists killing 5 of them. Some think it was the British to blame for this tragedy but others think it was the colonists fault for this event.
In Thomas Preston’s account of what happened that night, he claimed that he did not order anyone to fire. He said that the residents of Boston were obnoxious and pugnacious. Many other people have claimed that Boston
Mob violence was a persuasive feature of the Revolutionary War in every port city, particularly Boston. These mobs, which were often described as motley crews, were central to protests and ultimately played a dominant role in significant events leading up to the American Revolution. Throughout the years, leading up to the American Revolution, many Americans were growing tired of British rule and thus begun to want to break free from Britain and earn their own independence. Some of these Americans, out of anger, madness, and in defense of their rights, began terrorizing towns, sometimes even to the point of paralysis highlighting grievances and concerns that the common man couldn’t say with mere words. These groups would then be absorbed into a greater organization called the Sons of Liberty. With the use of violence and political strategy , these radicals defending their rights, struck terror into anyone opposing them but also carried out communal objectives ultimately pushing for change which was a central theme for the American Revolution. It will be proved that these men through their actions not only were the driving force behind resistance but also proved to be the men who steered America toward revolution.
On March 5, 1770, an event occurred in Boston, which consisted of British troops shooting upon colonists. People refer to this as a massacre, but they only look at one side of the story. The Boston Massacre in 1770 was not really a massacre, but a mutual riot (Boston Massacre History Society). British soldiers went to America to keep the people of Boston in order. However, the soldier's presence there was not welcomed by the Bostonians and this made things worse (Boston Massacre History Society). The British had to fire their guns because the Bostonians were antagonizing the soldiers, which caused five people to die. The Bostonians made the soldiers feel threatened so in turn they acted in self-defense. The British soldiers and their Captain had to go through a trial, to prove they were not to blame for what had occurred.
I will be discussing the differences between Captain Thomas Preston’s Account of the Boston Massacre (1770) and Paul Revere, Image of The Bloody Massacre (1770). I will explain both men’s story beginning with Captain Thomas Preston vision of the event, then explain Paul Revere version of the event. I will then include my opinion on which account I believe is most accurate and explain why.
This chapter provided information from the trial of Captain Thomas Preston. The chapter asked the question, “What really happened in the Boston Massacre”. Chapter four focused on the overall event of the Massacre and trying to determine if Captain Preston had given the order to fire at Boston citizens. The chapter provides background information and evidence from Preston’s trial to leave the reader answering the question the chapter presents. Although, after looking through all the witnesses’ testimonies some might sway in Captain Preston’s favor, just the way the grand jury did.
The Boston Massacre was one the most controversial massacre in American history that teased the coming of the American Revolution. People were taunting a British soldier who was standing “in front of the Boston Custom House” who got very frustrated to the point where he hit somebody. The soldier got overwhelmed by people who came after he hit one of them, called help from his fellow soldiers. When Captain Preston and his soldiers arrived at the scene, people were coming from everywhere, some were trying to fight them and some were just there to watch. Then, one of the soldier shot at the people and his fellow soldiers started shooting after, which killed five people. This what ended it up being called the Boston Massacre. Some might say that the murderer were the soldiers who shot the people, but the real murderer is
On March 5, 1770, five colonists lost their lives in what American history would deem their fight for liberty; however, several British soldiers were placed on trial for murder when they were only fighting for their lives against an anger mob. John Adams, who would become our second president, defended these soldiers in an attempted to prove their innocents. The trial was held on American soil and the outcome did not fare well for the British soldiers. Adams was able to keep them from receiving the death penalty, however both soldiers were “branded” for life as murders. Boston was a cauldro...