AP Notes, Outlines, Study Guides, Vocabulary, Practice Exams and more!
i need to know what the significance is of the boston massacre and what did it cause of what was the importance that it casued. thank you guys i dont have enough information according to my teacher he says that what i put isnt enough i need more info :confused: . thanks :)
:p Zacharys Morales
We hope your visit has been a productive one. If you're having any problems, or would like to give some feedback, we'd love to hear from you.
For general help, questions, and suggestions, try our dedicated support forums.
If you need to contact the Course-Notes.Org web experience team, please use our contact form.
While we strive to provide the most comprehensive notes for as many high school textbooks as possible, there are certainly going to be some that we miss. Drop us a note and let us know which textbooks you need. Be sure to include which edition of the textbook you are using! If we see enough demand, we'll do whatever we can to get those notes up on the site for you!
All I know thus far, because we just started this section today, is that one aspect of the Boston Massacre was the concept of mob rule and the fact the colonists were unifying in groups/mobs to voice their concerns with Britain. I am sure you know that the British opened fire on the colonists and killed a few men. Crispus Attucks was the first man killed. Sorry I can't help more... I would try going to Wikepedia online if you can't get any other replies. Just search Boston Massacre. It usually does a pretty descent job describing different aspects of things. Sorry again that I can't help more. Best of Luck...
--Peke
Another thing is that it was a chance for propaganda for both parties: for the colonies, to get the people rallied after this "unjustified massacre" [in which only like, 3 people were killed] against the British, and for the British to say "yeah, this is what you get for messing with us" ~ :p
thanks both of you thats more infor than i have i just drew a blank so thanks and i will go to Wikepedia i forgot about it
:p Zacharys Morales
Two regiment troops were sent by British officials to Boston in 1768. The colonials resented the drunk and disrespectful soldiers. Boston Massacre occured on March 5, 1770, the townspeople attacked the Redcoats, and provoked them. The Redcoats acted under no orders, and killed or wounded about 11 "innocent" citizens. Crispus Attucks was the leader of the mob, who was first murdered. The case was tried, and 2 men were guilty of manslaughter, while the rest were branded on the hand.
The illustration of "The Boston Massacre" by Paul Revere in 1770 contradicted the incident. It portrayed that the Redcoats WERE ordered to fire, when they actually weren't. It made the soldiers look like they planned manslaughter.
well..my teacher said that the crowd was a group of boys that was throwing snowballs at them..and the redcoats did not since they were not order to hurt the citizen..than some boys put rocks in their snowballs and chuck it at them until only one of them crack and shoot at the boy but the boy duck and the bullet hit the mullato..Attuck whatever his name XD. that is what my teacher told me
My book doesn't go into detail. It's really vague, but I guess we get the point, right?
it was propaganda....the paintings afterward display that the small incident was a "massacre"...it wasn't really a massacre...only a few died...but painters wanted to mold the rebel spirit in the colonists...so that they would support the anti- British cause....the major leaders at the time new that in order to start a war, they needed the complete support of the people....e.g, look at the Vietnam war....we lost it because the american people didn't want to commence a war...so basically colonial leaders were the ones that got their people outraged against the Brits :)
thats the significance of it...not just the story like all the other <This language is not needed please, thank you. -Course-Notes Managemnet> talk about...hope i helped
kellyle wrote:Two regiment troops were sent by British officials to Boston in 1768. The colonials resented the drunk and disrespectful soldiers. Boston Massacre occured on March 5, 1770, the townspeople attacked the Redcoats, and provoked them. The Redcoats acted under no orders, and killed or wounded about 11 "innocent" citizens. Crispus Attucks was the leader of the mob, who was first murdered. The case was tried, and 2 men were guilty of manslaughter, while the rest were branded on the hand.
The illustration of "The Boston Massacre" by Paul Revere in 1770 contradicted the incident. It portrayed that the Redcoats WERE ordered to fire, when they actually weren't. It made the soldiers look like they planned manslaughter.
Wether or not the order to "fire" was given is very conteversial. In my AP class last year we did a project on the Boston Massacre incident. When they case was brought to trial about half the witness said the order was given, while the other half said it hadn't been.
I can write up a full report hopefully tonight for ya. Right now food is calling my name.
yeah, gifted is pretty much right. it wusnt really a massacre since only 3 people died. i think like 11 were injured. i know that the soldiers werent howver ordered to fire but they were provoked for it. 2 of them were judged(the soliders) the rest got off scotch free. this event led to the boston tea party which really ticked off the english. then it leads to the navigational acts and all the taxing on stuff like sugar. uhm, so thats it in a nut shell. :D
Pages