Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on the boston massacre
An essay on the boston massacre
An essay on the boston massacre
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on the boston massacre
Were the actions on the night of March 5, 1770 in Boston, Massachusetts a massacre against innocent colonists? No it was not, instead it was an example of mob violence at its finest. The so-called "Boston Massacre", was not a massacre at all. At approximately 9:00 p.m. on March 5, 1770, an angry and rowdy mob of over fifty colonists gathered to induce a fight with only eight British soldiers, innocently standing guard as instructed in front of the Custom House. Unarmed? Absolutely not. The gang of colonists began hurling verbal assaults, ice chunks, rocks, and clubs at the severely outnumbered and frightened British, who warned the colonists to stop the violent outburst and disperse. Instead, the colonists increased the violence and continued
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.
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.
shown with the Boston Massacre.
Before the Boston Massacre even occurred, tensions were high in the city of Boston between the Bostonians and the British. At this time people were just getting over the Stamp Act and were now angered by the new taxes also known as the Townshend Duties. This new tax caused Bostonians to become more aggressive causing the British to send more soldiers to impose the laws of Parliament and to restore order among the people. The arrival of more soldiers only caused more of an uproar between the people of Boston and the red coats. Bostonians went out of their way to harass British soldiers whenever they got the chance, but on March 5, 1770 both sides acted unacceptably resulting in the Boston Massacre (84-85).
The Boston Massacre was an event that could have never happened. The innocent lives could have been saved and the British troopers would have never been put on Trial. The aftermath of the lives been loss in Boston Massacre was a trial to punish the British Troopers and finally get them out America. The lawyer of the British troops was a man named John Adams, who was the cousin of Sam Adams. John’s role in the Boston Massacre trial was to represent his clients without negotiate his role as an American. Since John had to stand behind the British troops, he had to team up with different other lawyers to make sure the British troops be treated fair. John’s ethic perspective was deontological ethics because he may not believe the British troops
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.
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.
The Boston Massacre occurred in the evening of March 5, 1770. A crowd of people began harassing the soldiers. One event lead to another and the crowd began hurling snowballs and rocks. One of the snowballs stuck a soldier and he fired his weapon causing a series of shots toward the crowd. “...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. This event was said to have started the American Revolution. This leads to the British seizing power over the
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 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, 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.
Many arguments were made against independence that “when this war is proclaimed, all supplies from foreign parts will be cut off,” leaving the Colonies subject to the will of the Canadians and “to the numerous tribes of savages,” who would, without hesitation, seek revenge on the colonists (Leonard, 2, 3). Another argument that seems to neither support nor oppose the prospect of independence is that “a love of Freedom is a predominating feature which marks and distinguishes the whole,” implying that such a thirst for freedom as is present in the colonies could lead to its ruin (Burke, 2). But, when news of the Boston Massacre spread throughout the colonies, although quite exaggerated, had the effect of pouring fuel onto an unlit fire of kindling and gunpowder. The Boston Massacre occurred March 5, 1770, when British soldiers fired into a crowd of people after a Whig protest of merchants selling English goods. But, the spark that ignited the war did not come until four years later, when the continental congress addressed parliament for a repeal of the Coercive Acts that was blatantly ignored. When it became clear that there was to be no repeal, the colonists began to prepare for their war for independence which
That day would happen on March 5th 1770. On this evening, a British guard was patrolling a custom house, some colonists began taunting the soldier and soon a crowd of angry colonists arrived. The British officer decided it would be necessary to call in more troops. Later, around eight soldiers arrived to support the guard, by this time the mob grew to about three hundred people. A colonist kicked one of the soldiers down, and the soldier fired upon the crowd. After a short pause, the other British troop fired on the colonists. Thanks to the press and art of Paul Revere, this event is now known as the Boston Massacre. The Boston Tea Party, one of the most famous events of per-revolution America. The British imposed a tax on all tea and this united the colonists in an agreement against the tax. The Sons of Liberty once again mobbed up and threatened the shop owners to not support the tax. Throughout the colonies, agents of the Tea Act were forced to resign. When this didn't seem to be enough, the Sons of Liberty devised a plan at the liberty tree in Boston. On the night of December 16th a group of men dressed as Mohawk Indians, boarded four British ships carrying tea and dumped it all into the harbor. This tea never landed and therefore this tea was never
The Boston Massacre is considered by many historians to be the first battle of the Revolutionary War. The fatal incident happened on March 5 of 1770. The massacre resulted in the death of five colonists. British troops in the Massachusetts Bay Colony were there to stop demonstrations against the Townshend Acts and keep order, but instead they provoked outrage. The British soldiers and citizens brawled in streets and fought in bars. “The citizens viewed the British soldiers as potential oppressors, competitors for jobs, and a treat to social mores'; (Mahin 1). A defiant anti-British fever was lingering among the townspeople.
Throughout history, events are sparked by something, which causes emotions to rise and tensions to come to a breaking point. The Boston Massacre was no exception; America was feeling the pressure of the British and was ready to break away from the rule. However, this separation between these two parties would not come without bloodshed on both sides. The British did not feel the American had the right to separate them from under British rule, but the Americans were tired of their taxes and rules being placed upon them and wanted to succeed from their political tyrants. The Boston Massacre would be the vocal point in what would be recognized, as the Revolutionary War in American history and the first place lives would be lost for the cost of liberty. Even though the lives were lost that day, eight British soldiers were mendaciously accused of murder when it was clearly self-defense. People who are placed in a situation where their lives are threatened have the right to defend themselves. History does not have the right to accuse any one event those history may have considered the enemy guilty when they are fighting for their lives.