The Loyalists And Patriots : The Causes Of The Boston Massacre

Summary of Facts The British responded by closing Boston Harbor, then followed with a series of legislative acts which effectively rescinded Massachusetts Bay Colony's rights of self-government and caused the other colonies to rally behind Massachusetts. In late 1774, the Patriots set up their own alternative government to better coordinate their resistance efforts against Great Britain; other colonists preferred to remain aligned to the British Crown and were known as Loyalists or Tories. Issues The Revolution became inevitable, describe the loyalties of most Americans.

This investigation will assess the significance of the causes of the Boston Massacre in 1770. It will also connect the relationship and perspective of British Troops verses the colonists and will study the effects of the various events that led up to the Massacre. In June 1767, British Parliament permitted the Townshend Acts which taxed import items such as tea, lead, glass, paint, and paper. They also constructed a Board of Custom Commissioners for America to be positioned in Boston. After this, Boston’s citizens rioted against the import taxes by creating anti-import movements in the colonies. The British Army soldiers killed five male civilians and wounded six others. The event was heavily propagandized by commanding patriots such as Paul Revere and Samuel Adams who ignited hostility towards the British powers. These events include riots against British taxations such as

On the evening of March 5, 1770, with a foot of snow on the ground, groups of Bostonians gathered around the Custom House on King Street. Some had buckets of water, after responding to a fire alarm. Others had clubs to defend themselves or perhaps to threaten the despised “lobsterbacks.” Private Hugh White was, in fact, being threatened by several wigmakers’ apprentices (Aron 24). When Captain Thomas Preston heard of Private White’s situation, he came with seven other soldiers to help. Words escalated into snowballs and stones, and the soldiers began to fight back with the butts of their guns. The crowd of Bostonians was growing and now numbered about 100 (24). Then, a huge chunk of ice came flying in from the mob and knocked

It was April 19, 1775 when the Bennets found out that the british were at war with the 13 colonies. The Boston Massacre had happened prior to the war and now the colonies decided to do something about it.

The Boston Massacre took place on March 5, 1770, where and British soldiers were involved in an incident that took 5 lives. This event was a push in the minds of colonists to rebel against the British. Even before this, many colonists were defying unjust British laws. Being heavily taxed without a say in Parliament created tension between the two groups. Because of this, a group of colonists formed a secret organization called the Sons of Liberty. Their purpose was to fight against British taxation and to protect their own rights. Of these brave people, out came a silversmith and Patriot leader, Paul Revere. He also recreated the Boston Massacre into an engraving. “The Bloody Massacre” was a piece of war propaganda that didn’t accurately depict

The Boston Massacre is one of the most controversial events in American history that occurred in Boston before the American Revolution. Certainly, it has a fundamental role in the development of America as a nation, which led it to have a huge motivation for revolution. A heavy British military presence and having very high taxes in the country were some of the main reasons that made Boston citizens very irritated. Thus, there were already many disagreements and tensions between inhabitants and the British that could have led to the Massacre. In this essay, I will carefully analyze three primary sources, and compare these to the interpretation given by HBO’s John Adams. In my view, these sources can be

Similar to the way that the colonial and British perspectives greatly varied for the Boston Massacre, their opinions are once again vastly different for the Battles of Lexington and Concord. In this event as well, both parties attempt to place the blame on the other which is not unusual due the nature of the sources. However, this highlights the large amount of bias evident in all of the accounts. For the colonial perspective, there are two statements, each from a member of a colonial militia that fought during the Battles of Lexington and Concord. Both of these sources place the blame on the British soldiers and claim that the British fired first, killing several colonists. One account, from the Battle of North Bridge, claims that the colonists were ordered to hold their fire and that they didn’t fire until the British opened fire upon them. The other account, from soldier who fought during the skirmish at the Lexington Green, states that the colonists did not even get a single shot off, at least not before the soldier whose account this is was wounded. This source also claims that the British commanding officers were yelling at and insulting the colonists as their ranks closed on the milita. Both these sources are very similar to the colonial perspectives of the Boston Massacre because they all place the blame on the British soldiers and attempt to make themselves appear as the victims.

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

During the late 1700s conflict arose between the greatest power in the world known as Great Britain and the colonies of America. The conflict that occurred is well known today as the Revolutionary War. While a lot of people see the Revolutionary War as America united together while fighting for freedom from the British government there were those in America who sought to stay loyal to the crown. As with any conflict, there are always two sides of the coin. Loyalists saw separation from England as a toxic idea that would only cause war and a reduction in wealth of America’s people while Revolutionists saw the need for freedom from all oppression, treachery and unfair taxation.

It was a bloody scene.Starting from the name itself, this landmark event of the American Revolution proved to be a magnet for popular myths and misconceptions.It was not called the “The Boston Massacre” until many years after it occurred in 1773. The first popular name popularized by Paul Revere was The Bloody Massacre in King Street. In the early 1800's it was also called the State Street Massacre.

The Boston Massacre was an important event in U.S. history, that lead to the American

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.     

All the dispute between American colonist and the government of United kingdom take place when King George III send his military to America to control the agony created by the American colonist. This move of ruling government was quite unacceptable for American colonist as they consider it quite uneasy situation for me (Neil L. York). This step enhances the resentment in local people, and they start showing their hate to the government and military of the ruling country. With the passage of time, the situation becomes worse for the government to maintain law and order situation in the colony of America. Ultimately all these small events of hate for the ruling government leads the situation towards the Boston Massacre.

After analyzing the video about the Boston Massacre, what it should be called depends all on which side you took. Patriots would have took this as a massacre because, not only would it blame the British, but their people were also considered "slaughtered". Thus, to the Patriots, this would be considered a massacre. However, for the Loyalists and British, this would be considered a riot. A crowd of colonists threw snowballs, stones, oyster shells, and even wood at British soldiers. This was basically a disturbance of peace, or a riot. The soldiers had the right of defending themselves, so I do understand the reasons for shooting, but killing wasn't necessary. In the end however, in my opinion, without being biased to any sides, the Boston Massacre should be considered a riot.

The newspaper was made so that the people could know what was happening around their community. Propaganda was very popular with the colonists even though most of the content that was printed in the newspaper was not always true. Even though it was not like by the government the colonists like the newspapers. The newspaper would show dramatize images to get the colonists to buy their newspaper just as patriot Paul Revere did for the printing of the Boston Massacre. He showed and exaggerated image of what had happened at the Boston Massacre.