Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Boston massacre essay 4 grade
The boston massacre 1770 essay
Boston massacre essay 4 grade
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Boston massacre essay 4 grade
In the article The Shoemaker and the Revolution written by Alfred F. Young, the transition from ordinary citizen to an assertive patriot is clearly articulated. This article focuses on one man specifically, George Robert Twelve Hewes, an apprenticing shoemaker who was personally affected by events in the revolution. The changes in Hewe’s occurred because of the Boston Massacre of 1770, The Boston Tea Party of 1773, and the tarring and feathering of John Malcolm in 1774. The events before and during the Boston Massacre of 1770 affected Hewes personally. The first of which was when he was cheated in payment from Sergeant Mark Burk. He claimed to be picking up shoes for Captain Thomas Preston and in the process didn’t pay Hewes for the shoes. …show more content…
Preston suggested that Hewes issue a formal complaint about the payment of the shoes, which he did.
After the hearing for the crime, Sergeant Burk was sentenced to three hundred and fifty lashes, much to Hewe’s horror. Then there was the murder of Christopher Seider on the 23 of February. Seider was in a group of schoolboys that was picketing a shop for selling british imports during the anti-import resolutions. Seider was shot by Ebenezer Richardson, who fired into the crowd without a true target. This happened 10 days before the Boston Massacre. The final event before the massacre was the fight between soldiers and colonists on Gray’s ropewalk on the night of Friday, March 3. The soldiers were beaten because they came to Gray’s ropewalk for work. The ropewalk workers didn’t want the soldiers to take their work from them because they thought that the british were already being payed too much and were being greedy by looking for more work. On the night of the massacre Hewes was attracted to the sounds of the townspeople. During the confrontation, Private Kilroy hit Hewe’s on the shoulder with the butt of his gun. When Captain Preston told the townspeople to disperse, Hewe’s told him that they had just as much right as the soldiers to be on the King’s highway. During the massacre five men were killed, four
of which Hewe’s claimed to know; Samuel Grey- a rope worker, Samuel Maverick- an apprentice to an ivory turner, Patrick Carr- an apprentice to a leather breeches worker, and James Caldwell who was a 2nd mate on a ship. The only man he did not know was Christopher Attucks. Hewes does a great job explaining events leading up to the massacre and the massacre itself, but he doesn’t explain why the soldiers are there to begin with and that the British troops leave in the end. The next event that affected Hewes was the Boston Tea Party which occurred on December 16, 1773. Hewes participated in the Boston Tea Party itself, he even dressed himself as a Mohawk indian. The organization of the Boston Tea Party was do to the determined colonist of Boston. They had anywhere from 50-100 men who volunteered. These men were strong willed, hardworking, and willing to take on the position of being a leader to the men around them. Hewes himself became a leader. He was told by the commander of his division to go and collect the keys of the hatches and candles from the British ship's captain. Over the span of the 3 hours that it took to dump all the tea chests into the Boston Harbor, Hewes took his leadership role to heart and helped find anyone that was trying to smuggle tea into their pockets to take home. One man specifically was Captain O’Connor who came onto the ships specifically to smuggle fallen tea into his pockets. This gave Hewes the leadership experience that he needed to further his political authority. Though Hewes doesn’t tell us about the tea acts or the intolerable acts, he does tell us about the strength and leadership of colonist as well as the breaking of the social class system and everyone coming to work together.
In Woody Holton's Forced Founders, that most revered segment of the revolutionary generation, the elitist gentry class of Virginia, comes across very much as a group of self-serving reactionaries, rather then the idealized revolutionaries of the great patriotic myth of popular history. He sets about disassembling a central portion of the myth created by earlier generations of Consensus historians, by asserting that rather then gallantly leading the charge for independence, Virginia's elitist gentry resorted to independence as their last and only means of saving their elite ruling status, their economic futures, and even their very lives many feared. While this is very much an example of revisionist history, Holton has not so much rewritten history, as he has provided the back story of the complexity and diversity of the Virginia colony on the eve of the American Revolution. For while the book's title may insinuate otherwise, lowly groups like slaves and Indians discussed here are afforded only the status of “founders” by pressing those traditionally thought of in this role to take the plunge for independence. Still the papers and correspondence of the iconic figureheads of the revolutionary generation like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison make up the bulk of primary sources.
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
Gary B. Nash argues that the American Revolution portrayed “radicalism” in the sense on how the American colonies and its protesters wanted to accommodate their own government. Generally what Gary B. Nash is trying to inform the reader is to discuss the different conditions made by the real people who were actually fighting for their freedom. In his argument he makes it clear that throughout the revolution people showed “radicalism” in the result of extreme riots against the Stamp Act merchants, but as well against the British policies that were implemented. He discusses the urgency of the Americans when it came to declaring their issues against the British on how many slaves became militants and went up against their masters in the fight for a proclamation to free themselves from slavery. But he slowly emerges into the argument on how colonists felt under the
The benefit of hindsight allows modern historians to assume that colonists in British America united easily and naturally to throw off the bonds of tyranny in 1775-1776. The fact that "thirteen clocks were made to strike together" (p.4) surprised even the revolutionary leader John Adams. Prior to the mid-1700s many residents of British North America saw themselves in regional roles rather than as "Americans", they were Virginians or Bostonians, regional loyalties trumped any other including those as British colonial citizens. In T. H. Breen's work, The Marketplace of Revolution, he offers an explanation for the sudden creation of a unique American identity. In his words, "What gave the American Revolution distinctive shape was an earlier transformation of the Anglo-American consumer marketplace" (p. xv). Breen contends that before Americans could unite to resist the British Empire, they needed to first develop a unity and trust with one another in spite of their regional differences. "The Marketplace of Revolution argues, therefore, that the colonists shared experience as consumers provided them with the cultural resources needed to develop a bold new form of political protest" (p. xv). The transformation of the consumer marketplace allowed the colonists of British North America to create a unique British and the American identity that would later result in revolution and the formation of a new nation. This trust based on consumption, Breen concludes, was absolutely necessary for the boycott movement to be an effective tool against the British government. "Unless unhappy people develop the capacity to trust other unhappy people protest remains a local affair easily silence by traditional authority" (p.1).
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.
Alfred Young is a historian who takes a harder look at the life of an ordinary Boston man, George Robert twelves Hewes, before and after the revolution changes in America. The book looks at the developments that led up to the American Revolution through the life Hewes, who goes from a shoemaker to a rebel. Not only was Hewes a participant in the Boston Massacre, he was also involved in the event that later would be referred to as the Tea party. His involvements in these events paint a clearer picture of what can motivate someone to take up arms and fight for their freedom.
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,
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
...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.
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.
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.
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.