The Boston Massacre, 245 Years Ago

History.com ^ | March 5, 2015 | Evan Andrews

[gusopol3]

On the evening of March 5, 1770, an altercation broke out in Boston between a British sentry and a group of American colonists. When British troops converged on the scene, an angry mob formed and began yelling insults and pelting them with snowballs and debris. In the midst of the chaos, the panicked soldiers let loose with a volley of musket fire, killing five men and injuring several others. The “Boston Massacre” became a rallying cry for Patriot leaders like Samuel Adams, and the colonies teetered on the brink of insurrection for several days. Future President John Adams would later successfully defend the British soldiers in court, but the incident served as a bloody warning that revolution was just around the corner

[gusopol3]

Produced just three weeks after the Boston Massacre, Paul Revere’s historic engraving,“The Bloody Massacre in King-Street,” was probably the most effective piece of war propaganda in American history. Not an accurate depiction of the actual event, it shows an orderly line of British soldiers firing into an American crowd and includes a poem that Revere likely wrote. Revere based his engraving on that of artist Henry Pelham, who created the first illustration of the episode—and who was neither paid nor credited for his work.http://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/road-revolution/resources/paul-revere%E2%80%99s-engraving-boston-massacre-1770

[cripplecreek]

Just a very cool promotional poster



Season Premier April 13th.

[gusopol3]

Dr. Joseph Warren gave anniversary oration in 1772 and again in 1775, 3 months before his death at Bunker Hill.

“The voice of your fathers’ blood cries to you from the ground; MY SONS SCORN TO BE SLAVES! in vain we met the frowns of tyrants; in vain, we crossed the boisterous ocean, found a new world, and prepared it for the happy residence of LIBERTY; in vain, we toiled; in vain, we fought; we bled in vain, if you, our offspring, want valour to repel the assaults of her invaders! Stain not the glory of your worthy ancestors; but like them resolve, never to part with your birthright; be wise in your deliberations, and determined in your exertions for the preservation of your liberties. Follow not the dictates of passion, but enlist yourselves under the sacred banner of reason; use every method in your power to secure your rights; at least prevent the curses of posterity from being heaped upon your memories.”
http://ahp.gatech.edu/boston_mass_orat_1772.html

[EvilCapitalist]

Rush covers all of this in his latest Rush Revere book.

[PAR35]

And, of course, stirring up trouble was a black activist. The original ‘unarmed black man shot by law enforcement’

[gusopol3]

The red coats got off , too.

[gusopol3]

I think the guy third from the right border might be the Muslim Obama’s always talking about. And if this were a tapestry rather than a poster, he could even said to be “woven into the fabric.”

[Fiddlstix]

Bookmark

[cripplecreek]

That's Robert Rogers played by Angus McFayden.



Rogers was the enemy but easily ranks up there with our founders in his contributions to the creation of America. Our Military still uses Rogers Rules. Truly the original American commando.

[gusopol3]

It’s a heck of a story how he snared Nathan Hale, and after being such a hero to America only 20 years before.

[A Formerly Proud Canadian]

Too bad the ancestors of the Boston Marathon massacre had not been victims of the Boston Massacre.

[rlmorel]

I’m on it. Some say it got a tepid response, but I really liked it.

[cripplecreek]

Obviously there is the added drama but the history is reasonably solid. I was impressed that they didn’t sugarcoat the Dunmore proclamation.

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

funny.....”Follow not the dictates of passion,....”...as I am whipping you up right now....

[gusopol3]

I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him

[Flick Lives]

3rd from the left, is that Brian Williams!?

[gusopol3]

lol

[rlmorel]

What about it has been sugarcoated? I do ask this in true ignorance...I know what the document is and was purported to be at the time, but I don’t know much beyond the purpose presented on the face of it.

Was it the fact simply that it outraged slave holders in the colonies, and that face of it has not been often presented in the historical picture by Virginians, or was it something like the perceived nefarious intentions of the British to simply cause hate and discontent with it?

Or was it that the British welshed on their offer to some number of slaves who did take up their offer?

What is your take on it? I consider myself reasonably well educated in history, but details of this piece have evaded me.

[cripplecreek]

Its usually presented as a document that freed the slaves when the reality is that it was a bill of attainder that stripped patriots of their property slaves included. The freedom it offered was very limited and very conditional. Slaves who didn’t fight were resold or given to favored loyalist families.

I was pleased that the show didn’t portray the Dunmore proclamation as simply freeing the slaves and they all lived happily ever after. I was also happy that the show showed that some slaves chose to take the patriot side of their own free will.

[rlmorel]

Thanks, CC. I understand now. That is good context.