More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on what really happened in the boston massacre
Essay on what really happened in the boston massacre
The boston massacre 1770 essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Boston Massacre was a very big event in the history of the United States, some call it the “spark” of the American Revolution. I believe that the actions of the British soldiers should not be considered as an accident for a few reasons, my first reason being how long the shooting was drawn out, most people use the taunting that the colonist used as the main reason this was an accident, but if it was accidental fire, why did they let all soldiers fire without trying to stop them once. My second reason is the amount of power the colonist had compared to the soldiers, the colonist mostly being armed with only snowballs, or clubs along with anything else that was small and throwable, while the soldiers were fully armed with rifles. My last reason that I believe the soldiers were intentional …show more content…
The reason I am using his temperament as my last reason is how people sometimes act when angry, they like to act based off of anger without thinking. Since the soldier was standing there, in the moment, in a tense situation, a club hitting him and knocking him off of his feet more than likely angered him, since he was angry he probably open fired into the crowd without thinking, and later used the colonists taunts as his excuse. Even if it wasn't as bad as I just described, I still believe that a bad temperament could have played a large role in the events of the Boston Massacre.
The boston massacre was definitely a large event in the history of the United States of America, it was one of the main things that lead to the American Revolution. There are multiple things that could be responsible for the Boston massacre, but as far as it goes I believe that it was an accident, and that the lives lost were for good reason. I hope that my essay helped to see that it could have been intentional. There was so much that happened on that day it is still hard to tell what really happened during the boston massacre, intentional or
Captain Thomas Preston’s vision of the Boston massacre was an incident were a British soldier accidently fired his weapon and his men then followed after resulting in the death of five Bostonians including free black sailor Cripus Attucks. Starting the story Captain Thomas Preston admits that the arrival of the Majesty’s Troops were obnoxious to the inhabitants. Troops have done everything in their power to weaken the regiments by falsely propagating untruths about them. On Monday at 8 o’ clock two soldiers were beaten and townspeople then broke into two meetinghouses and rang the bells. But at 9 o’ clock some troops have informed Captain Thomas Preston that the bell was not ringing to give notice for a fire but to make the troops aware of the attack the towns people were going to bring upon them.
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
I read a book about the Boston Massacre the was originally named the bloody massacre. The amount of killed persons is generally accepted to be 5 people. The Fifth of March is a 1993 novel about the Boston Massacre (of March 5, 1770) by historian and author Ann Rinaldi, who was also the author of many other historical fiction novels such as Girl in Blue and A Break with Charity. This book is about a young indentured servant girl named Rachel Marsh who finds herself changing as she meets many people, including young Matthew Kilroy, a British private in the 29th regiment.
Accidents do happen, as shown with the Boston Massacre. The crowds were getting rowdy, made then British soldiers panic, and they opened up fire.
Overall, it seems that the tragedy that happened in Boston of the night of March 5th could have been avoided if the citizen of Boston had acted differently. If the crowd had not been in such mayhem, the soldiers would have been able to hear the Captain more clearly and they never would have fired without the proper command. As for Captain Preston, he received the verdict he deserved because as witnesses can attest he never yelled fire, he actually yelled the opposite. The overall massacre was one big misunderstand that sadly ended in tragedy with average Bostonians losing their lives.
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines massacre as “the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty” or “a cruel or wanton murder” (m-w.com). Essentially a massacre results in either the death of many people or death by cruel means. The Boston Massacre occurred on March 5, 1770, in Boston, Massachusetts and involved American colonists and British troops. The colonists, upset by recent laws enacted by the British, taunted a smaller group of British soldiers by throwing snowballs at them (Boston Massacre Historical Society). In response, the soldiers fired upon the unarmed colonists leaving five people dead and six wounded (Phelan, 131). Even though the event in Boston on March 5, 1770, in which blood was shed, and called the Boston Massacre, the actions which took place on that day did not constitute a massacre. Since only five people were killed and six wounded and there was no evidence of cruelty, the name Boston Massacre was likely a propaganda ploy by Samuel Adams to rally the colonists against the British instead of a true massacre.
It had a large impact on the lives of the citizens by allowing them to say whatever they wanted about the government in a newspaper or other form of public writing. John Peter Zenger is now known today for giving us this freedom. “The loss of liberty in general would soon follow the suppression of the liberty of the press; for it is an essential branch of liberty, so perhaps it is the best preservative of the whole. ” B is for The Boston Massacre.
The British were to fault for the Boston massacre making it a great historical tragedy in our country. A reason why the Boston Massacre was the fault of the British is because they killed the colonists by firing their weapons in the crowd of 30-40 colonists. In the text it says (Boston massacre 2). "30-40 persons, mostly lads…the soldiers pushing their bayonets into people...the Captain
Even though no one can know for sure who attacked first, the soldiers or the colonists the colonists still fought showing it wasn’t one sided so not a massacre. The evidence that supports my claim is in John Buford’s painting (document B)you can see colonists holding clubs, cudgels, and other weapons and they are using them. This corroborates with the information given in Captain Thomas Preston’s article stated “On this a general attack was made . . . by a great number of heavy clubs and snowballs being thrown at them [the soldiers], by which all our lives were in imminent (immediate) danger,” This evidence supports my claim because although Captain Preston may have a bias against the colonists, John buford’s painting has virtually no bias considering it was painted about one hundred years after the event happened.
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 ...
Whitehouse goes on to saying that a soldier got knocked down by a chunk of wood that a man got it from under his coat. Based on most against Preston and some for Preston testimonies like the Benjamin Burdick against testimony, he said that he saw” stick thrown at the Soldiers” not a big chunk of wood that would knock a soldier out. Whitehouse testimony was most likely to distract the jury from the other strong testimonies that were made against Preston, so they might think that there is something that they are misinterpreted from the other testimonies. These testimonies show evidence that Preston ordered his soldiers to fire at people who some of them were innocents who were just there to fulfill their curiosity of the situation to murder them. The Boston Massacre created a new attitude in people that was not there before. It created more hatred toward the British forces living with them and taking their money from them. It also made us understand that the American Revolution is coming because the people will not wait until another massacre to happen to kill more people of their own, they want the British to
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.
The second reason is somewhat odd. The removal of two out of four regiments meant there were to inadequate amounts of soldiers to keep the peace. There were enough on the other hand to remind the patriots of the great British military.
On March 5, 1770 a fight broke out in the streets of Boston, Massachusetts between a patriot mob and British soldiers. Citizens attacked a squad of soldiers by throwing snowballs, stones and sticks. British Army soldiers in turn killed five civilians and injured six others. The presence of British troops had been stationed in Boston, the capital of Province of Massachusetts Bay since 17681. The British existence was increasingly unwelcome. The British troops were sent to Boston in order to protect and support the crown-appointed colonial officials attempting to enforce unpopular Parliamentary legislation.
There are three main reasons that show the British intended to murder the colonists all along. The first reason is the soldiers were attacking unarmed colonists in the streets before the massacre happened. George Sanderlin walking around in the streets before the massacre started. Sanderlin states that, “...they attacked single and unarmed persons till they raised much clamor.” The soldiers wouldn’t attack defenseless colonists in the streets if they were trying to protect themselves. Sanderlin explained that Samuel