Whites of Their Eyes

field_image
photography, Muskets, 3 Jun 2007, Brett Weinstein, Flickr CC
Question

Who said, "Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes?"

Answer

It seems that many military officers have uttered this famous directive, or variations of it. It was a practical command for 18th-century armies, considering the inaccuracy of smooth-bore muskets and the risk of ammunition shortages. Similar commands are attributed to such military legends as British General James Wolfe during the French and Indian War and Prussian soldiers during the time of Frederick the Great, among others. However, the phrase is usually associated with the Battle of Bunker Hill early in the American Revolution. Historians have not settled the debate over exactly which American officer gave the order.

Historians have not settled the debate over exactly which American officer gave the order.

In May of 1775, British General Thomas Gage planned to occupy Dorchester Heights, part of a peninsula that was of strategic importance to holding and defending Boston. General Artemus Ward, commander of Patriot forces around Boston, placed Colonel William Prescott in charge of defending the peninsula from the British. Prescott and his forces dug in on Breed’s Hill, next to Bunker Hill, to build a fortification. British forces in the harbor opened fire on the men, but Prescott managed to convince the troops to continue working on the fortification by deliberately exposing himself to the fire from the British ship. Brigadier Israel Putnam also risked his life to travel between the Bunker and Breed Hills into Cambridge to demand reinforcements and additional equipment.

The American troops on the peninsula were short on powder and lead, so they had to conserve their ammunition. When the British infantry attacked, Patriot commanders Brigadier General John Stark, Thomas Knowlton, Prescott, and Putnam all ordered their men to keep silent. Just before the battle commenced, according to eyewitnesses, one of the commanders ordered their men not to fire “until you see the whites of their eyes.” Some reported that Prescott gave the order, but others remembered Putnam or Stark uttering these famous words. It is also possible that Prescott, commander of the forces on Bunker and Breed Hills gave the order and others repeated it. We will probably never know.

After a bloody battle, the Americans ran out of ammunition and were forced to retreat from the peninsula. However, the American militia’s valor earned them considerable respect, and Bunker Hill proved to the British that the Patriots were serious. Although they were the victors, the British sustained many more casualties (226 dead, 828 injured) than the Americans (140 killed, 271 wounded). General Gage compared Patriot soldiers’ behavior to his perception of colonists’ conduct during the French and Indian War, observing that the Americans showed “a Spirit and Conduct against us, they never shewed against the French.” The Battle of Bunker Hill put the British on notice that they might be fighting a long war.

For more information

Ketchum, Richard M. The Battle of Bunker Hill. New York: Doubleday & Co., 1962.

Shy, John. A People Numerous and Armed: Reflections on the Military Struggle for American Independence. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1976.

Bibliography

Fleming, Thomas. Now We Are Enemies: The Story of Bunker Hill. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1960.

Middlekauf, Robert. The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789. New York & Oxford: Oxford UP, 1982.

Nelson, James L. With Fire and Sword: The Battle of Bunker Hill and the Beginning of the American Revolution. New York: Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin’s Press, 2011.

Are There Instances of Raids Similar to the Boston Tea Party?

field_image
1875 centennial tea party at Capitol
Question

The Boston Tea Party is well documented, but are there other instances of similar raids?

Answer

The Boston Tea Party was one of many of confrontations from Charleston, South Carolina, to York, Maine, in 1773 and 1774 to prevent shipments of East India tea from entering the Colonies.

Since 1767, boycotts and non-importation agreements in opposition to the Townshend Revenue Acts had promoted political networks and personal connections across the colonies. Perhaps most importantly, regardless of their success or failure, these early resistance actions created a growing sense of common cause among colonists that began to trump local insularity and economic, social, and geographic differences.

The British underestimated extent of colonial political mobilization and the adamancy of colonial commitment to "no taxation without representation," even though colonial opposition had influenced Parliament's repeal of the Townshend Acts in 1770 (with the exception of the tax on tea). In 1773, Britain then imposed the Tea Act, in an attempt to bail out the financially-ailing British East India Tea Company. The Act allowed the company to sell directly to America, thereby bypassing competitors, circumventing British taxation, and generating sufficient corporate income to avoid bankruptcy. The Act actually lowered the price of tea in America; colonists, however, perceived it as another scheme to circumscribe what they had come to define as their rights.

. . . revenue acts are opposite to the very idea and spirit of liberty . . . whenever Tea is swallowed, and pretty well digested, we shall have new duties imposed on other articles of commerce . . .

Colonists acted swiftly toward nullification, generating newspapers and broadsides urging colonists once again to refuse to buy imported goods. A strongly-worded article in the Pennsylvania Packet stated,". . . revenue acts are opposite to the very idea and spirit of liberty . . . whenever Tea is swallowed, and pretty well digested, we shall have new duties imposed on other articles of commerce."

In 1773, colonists consumed an estimated 1,200,000 pounds of tea annually, much of it smuggled from Holland. It was perhaps reasonable that the East India Company believed colonial resistance to buying their tea would dissolve if they could get tea to land and offer it for sale. They engaged ships scheduled to arrive simultaneously in November 1773 in Charleston, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston and made arrangements to find American brokers for their cargo—generally merchants whose personal loyalties lay with the Crown.

All these pre-arrangements made for a poorly-kept secret: American political activists were well apprised beforehand when and where the tea ships were going to try to make port and unload their cargo and news of activities at each port was immediately sent to the others so that all their actions could be coordinated.

In Lexington, ". . . they brought together every ounce contained in the town, and committed it to one common bonfire . . ."

Nowhere in the American Colonies was the East India Company able to sell its tea. Outside of Boston, colonists, merely by persuasion or by bullying the shippers and consignees, were able to prevent the landing of the tea into port—or at least its sale. In Boston too, more than a month before the Tea Party, a body of men gathered in the street outside the store of tea merchant Richard Clarke, demanded that the proprietor vow not to receive any tea shipments. One merchant wrote that the crowd, "not receiving such an answer as they demanded, they began an attack upon the store and those within, breaking down doors, flinging about mud, &c., for about an hour, when they began to disperse, and a number of gentlemen, friends of those agents coming to their assistance, they left the store and went upon change, but met with no further insult, tho' there is much threatening."

In Lexington, the inhabitants met and resolved not to use tea of any sort, no matter where it had come from, and to show their sincerity, "they brought together every ounce contained in the town, and committed it to one common bonfire." Boston, perhaps, was unique among the other major American ports insofar as its Colonial Governor, Thomas Hutchinson, was relatively eager to demonstrate to the "troublemakers," with whom he had already had a series of confrontations, that he was the supreme authority in the affairs of the Colony of Massachusetts. This certainly contributed to why events played out in Boston as they did. (Visit this Ask a Historian response for details of events in the Boston Harbor.)

Events that happened elsewhere, after the Boston Tea Party on December 14, 1773, were also later styled tea parties, linking them to the momentous action in Boston. Like the Boston Tea Party, they were efforts to reject tea shipments and to enforce a boycott of the East India Company's product.

Charleston

On December 3, 1773, Alexander Curling, the captain of the London, had brought a cargo of tea to port in Charleston, but its consignees had refused delivery. On December 22, a week after the Boston Tea Party, a committee of colonists told Curling to return the tea to England, but the captain balked. The customs collector then had the 257 tea chests seized for non-payment of customs duties, unloaded, and stored in a locked room in the Exchange building (they were sold in 1776, with the proceeds going to finance the Revolutionary cause).

In late June of 1774, Captain Richard Maitland brought tea into Charleston harbor aboard the British ship Magna Carta. When local officials confronted him, he told them he would return the tea to England, but local men boarded the ship after hearing rumors that he intended to sell the tea. Captain Maitland took refuge on board the 100-gun British man-of-war HMS Britannia. That ship landed seven chests of tea in Charleston on November 3, but local officials ordered the merchant consignees to dump it in the Cooper River "as an Oblation to Neptune," and in order to avoid mob violence, they did.

Philadelphia

On Christmas Day, 1773, three days after the tea from the London was seized in Charleston, the British ship Polly, laden with 698 cases of tea, sailed up the Delaware River toward Philadelphia and landed at Chester, Pennsylvania. Its captain, Samuel Ayres, was escorted into the city where he was met by a committee of hard men representing a mass meeting of perhaps 8,000 citizens who told him that he had better return the tea to England. They may have offered to pay some of his expenses and may also have drawn his attention to a broadside that promised to tar and feather him if he attempted to unload the tea. The broadside promised the same treatment to any river pilot who tried to bring the ship into Philadelphia and to any consignee who attempted to accept the shipment. The Polly sailed away without putting into port.

Boston

On December 10, just before the Boston Tea Party, the brig William, which had been headed to Boston along with the other tea-laden ships, wrecked off Provincetown. The ship's captain, Joseph Loring, off-loaded the 58 chests of its tea cargo before abandoning the ship, and sent it along to Boston for safe keeping, by agreement with the consignee, the son of Boston tea merchant Richard Clarke. Jonathan Clarke, who had rushed to Wellfleet to make the transfer, allowed his cousin there, David Greenough, to have two cases to sell on Cape Cod, a small amount of which he sold to a Colonel Willard Knowles, who also happened to be in charge of the town of Eastham's stock of ammunition. When their neighbors discovered what had happened, both men were brought into disrepute. Action erupted on March 7, 1774, when about 80 people unsuccessfully tried to "wrest the Towns Ammunition out of the Hands of Col. Knowles." Knowles's neighbors eventually forgave him, and Greenough apparently destroyed the rest of the tea from his two cases.

That left 56 chests of the William's cargo that had been sent to Boston. The Sons of Liberty quickly discovered where it was being kept and raided the place, but found only half of it, 28 cases, which they smashed and emptied into the harbor.

On March 7, 1774, as Colonel Knowles confronted his Eastham neighbors, and a day that Colonial Governor Thomas Hutchinson had proclaimed a day of public fasting, a band of men, evidently believing they had located some of the William's tea that remained, entered the Boston shop of tea merchant Davison, Newman, & Company (whose tea had been destroyed in the Boston Tea Party) and took 16 chests of tea down to the harbor, broke them open, and dumped the contents into the water. This has been referred to as the second Boston Tea Party.

Again, on the same day, March 7, 1774, King George III sent a message to the British Parliament, asking it to exact retribution for the destruction of tea in Boston. Parliament obliged him by passing the Boston Port Act, which would close the port to commerce, beginning on June 1.

New York City

On April 18, 1774, the Nancy, commanded by Captain Benjamin Lockyer, having been blown far off course by storms, finally anchored at Sandy Hook, "having on board something worse than a Jonah, which, after being long tossed in the tempestuous ocean, it is hoped, like him, will be thrown back upon the place from whence it came," according to the New York Journal. Its cargo consisted of 698 chests of tea. The consignees sent a note to him, saying they would not accept the tea because it would "expose so considerable a property to inevitable destruction." They advised Lockyer that, "for the safety of your cargo, your vessel, and your persons, it will be most prudent for you to return" to England. Members of the New York chapter of the Sons of Liberty took charge of the Nancy at Sandy Hook, and prevented its crew from deserting the ship, and escorted Lockyer into New York City, where he agreed to return to England with the tea and began procuring supplies to do so.

Meanwhile, on April 22, the ship London (which had been in Charleston in December) arrived, now under the command of a Captain Chambers. Although Chambers protested that he had no tea aboard, the Sons of Liberty had received word from Philadelphia that he was smuggling 18 chests, for his own profit, hidden among the ship's blankets. Chambers was taken into custody and members of the Sons of Liberty searched the ship, discovered the tea chests, broke them open, dumped the tea into the river, and brought the busted chests back to the city, where they were used to ignite bonfires in the streets. Chambers was threatened with his life, but he managed to escape, and made his way to the Nancy. A few days later, the ship sailed back to England with both Lockyer and Chambers aboard.

Princeton, New Jersey

One night in late January, 1774, Princeton College students from all the colonies broke into the College's storeroom, and then, as described by student Charles Beatty, "gathered all the steward's winter store of tea and having made a fire on the campus we there burned near a dozen pound, tolled the bell, and made many spirited resolves." They also made an effigy of Massachusetts Governor Hutchinson, tied a tea canister around its neck, and burned it in front of Nassau Hall. Students subsequently continued their agitations, including paying nocturnal visits in groups of 40 "drest in white," to local townspeople rumored to be tea drinkers, seizing their stock of tea, and burning it.

Chestertown, Maryland

On May 23, 1774, the local chapter of the Sons of Liberty, having heard that the Port of Boston was to be closed, and having passed a series of "resolves" against buying, selling, or drinking tea shipped from England, heard that the brig Geddes (which was possibly owned by the local customs inspector, William Geddes, who was also a merchant) had put into port in Chestertown with tea in its cargo. They boarded the brig by force and dumped its tea into the Chester River.

Some of the facts in this instance are a little spare—such as who owned the tea and where it had come from. Nevertheless, the city of Chestertown stages an enthusiastic reenactment of the "Chestertown Tea Party" every Memorial Day weekend.

Annapolis, Maryland

In the summer of 1774, Thomas Charles Williams, the London representative of an Annapolis merchant firm, tried to smuggle tea across the Atlantic into Annapolis by disguising nearly a ton of it in 17 packages labeled as linen, and loading it among the rest of the cargo on the brig Peggy Stewart. The captain of the brig, Richard Jackson, only discovered the true nature of the "linen" while at sea. A few years before, an Annapolis precedent had been set when its customs officer refused to allow any ships to unload any portion of their cargo until the tax on all of it had been paid. This now alarmed Captain Jackson because most of the rest of the Peggy Stewart's cargo consisted of 53 indentured servants.

The ship reached Annapolis on October 14, 1774, and Williams's business partners decided they wanted nothing to do with his attempt at smuggling. They could not think of risking the lives of the indentured servants by sending the ship back across the Atlantic during the storm season which had just begun. They paid the customs tax due and quickly got the human cargo ashore, leaving the tea onboard. The presence of tea aboard ship had inflamed public opinion in Annapolis. Williams and his business partners were threatened with lynching; their store and their homes, with destruction. To avoid that, the business partners offered to burn the Peggy Stewart, which they owned, along with its cargo, which they did, on the night of October 19. This came to be called the Annapolis Tea Party. The city of Annapolis marks this each year with a ceremony.

York, Maine

On September 15, 1774, the sloop Cynthia sailed into harbor at York, Maine, from Newfoundland with a cargo that included 150 pounds of tea for its owner, local judge and Tory sympathizer, Jonathan Sayward. The local Sons of Liberty noted its arrival and called a town meeting on September 23. Meeting participants voted to seize the tea, which was done against the objections of the ship's captain, Sayward's nephew, James Donnell. The tea was placed in a storeroom, "until further Discovery could be made." That night, "a Number of Pickwacket Indians" (so it was said) broke into the storeroom and made off with the tea. Two days later, however, it was mysteriously returned, so perhaps Sayward was able to drink his tea after all, without having to pay customs duty on it (because it had been stolen). This was later called the York Tea Party.

Greenwich, New Jersey

In the summer of 1774, the captain of the small ship, Greyhound, loaded with East India Company tea, was reluctant to try to unload his shipment in Philadelphia, so just before the Delaware Bay, he put into Cohansey Creek, and anchored at the little hamlet of Greenwich, New Jersey. There he unloaded his cargo, and it was put into the cellar of a Loyalist, Daniel Bowen, who intended to have it eventually carried overland into Philadelphia and to sell it there.

On the night of December 22, 1774, after planning in secret for several months, 40 locals dressed as Indians broke into Bowen's house, carried the cases of tea into a field, dumped the tea in a large pile, and set it all on fire. Those who participated in this tea party were arrested but were not convicted because the jury was in complete sympathy with them.

Bibliography

Benjamin W. Labaree, "Boston Tea Party: American Revolution,"United States at War: Understanding Conflict and Society, ABC-CLIO, January 7, 2009, http://www.usatwar.abc-clio.com (accessed January 2009).

T.H. Breen, The Marketplace of Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 294–331.

Francis Samuel Drake, Tea Leaves: Being a Collection of Letters and Documents Relating to the Shipment of Tea to the American Colonies in the Year 1773, by the East India Tea Company (Boston: A. O. Crane, 1884), 84–85, 256–259.

John R. Alden, A History of the American Revolution (New York: Da Capo Press, 1989), 138–140.

Ruth M. Miller and Ann Taylor Andrus, Charleston's Old Exchange Building: A Witness to American History (Charleston: The History Press, 2005), 26–28.

David Lee Russell, The American Revolution in the Southern Colonies (Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland, 2000), 46.

Edward S. Gifford, Jr, The American Revolution in the Delaware Valle (Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Society of Sons of the Revolution, 1976), 21-22.

Isaac Q. Leake, Memoir of the Life and Times of General John Lamb (Albany: Joel Munsell, 1850), 80–83.

Albert Ulmann, "The Tea Party New York Had," The New York Times, January 21, 1899, BR38.

Theresa Barbo, "A Bitter Wellfleet Tea Party," in True Accounts of Yankee Ingenuity and Grit from the Cape Cod Voice (Charleston: The History Press, 2007), 23–26.

Edwin Mark Norris, The Story of Princeton (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1917) 78–79.

Willis Rudy, The Campus and a Nation in Crisis: From the American Revolution to Vietnam (Madison, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996) 10–12.

Charles Edward Banks, The History of York, Maine, Volume 1 (Boston: Calkins Press, 1931), 386.

George Ernst, New England Miniature: A History of York, Maine (Freeport, ME.: Bond Wheelwright Company, 1961), 76.

"The Tea Party at York Maine," http://imaginemaine.com/Tea_Party.html (accessed January 2009).

Website of the annual Chestertown Tea Party Festival, http://www.chestertownteaparty.com/ (accessed January 2009).

Teaching the Declaration without Overwhelming Students

Image
photomechanical print, Writing the Declaration of Independence--1776, 28 July 19
Question

How might I teach the Declaration of Independence to high school students who are visual and verbal learners? What films or reading assignments will engage them, and yet not overwhelm them with the sometimes difficult wording of the Declaration itself?

Answer

Ah, the Declaration of Independence, a document so essential to understanding our American past and present that every student should read and learn about it. Luckily, its ideas and historical significance are truly engaging and can help make its difficult eighteenth century prose more accessible for our students.

Below are some ideas:

How about starting with an idea or line from the document? One of our favorites is the line regarding the right and duty for those threatened with absolute tyranny to “throw off such government.” This is one of several powerful ideas in the Declaration that can engage students before they confront the entire document. (It could also be just considering the document’s title! Declaring independence is something most adolescents can get their heads around and this can lead into exploring when and why this might happen and how one might frame such a declaration to win supporters. Consider what “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,” signaled to readers on both sides of the Atlantic and how they had gotten to this radical place.)

Considering the historical and contemporary significance of the document can also engage. Do students have a grasp of the road to Revolution, do they understand the chain of events and rising discontent in the Colonies? The risk to the signers? The historical moment? This background knowledge can help students in understanding the import of the document and its prose. Or look at instances where the document serves as a model (the Seneca Falls Declaration)
or reference point (MLK’s reference to it as “promissory note” in his I Have a Dream Speech)

As far as reading the document, we suggest two intertwined approaches (both to be used with a transcribed version).

1. Help students see the structure of the document so they know what to expect. Show them how it moves from initial paragraphs that get what the states are doing and why, to a list of specific grievances, to assurances that these are not capricious complaints or actions and then the ultimate declaration.

2. Plan activities where they read excerpts from the document closely and carefully. Phrases and sentences work here—select them carefully and scaffold student work with strategies like pair work, paraphrasing, and vocabulary help.

Some other ideas include:
Looking at the original document.

Sign the document. Have students find the anomaly (your signature) on a handout or decide whether to sign on themselves after considering the stories behind the signers and the historical moment.

Look at the rough draft of the Declaration or use this lesson plan which involves a careful comparison between the drafts.

For a primer on the document, see this historian’s helpful discussion that includes a consideration of the historical events surrounding the Declaration, analyses of particular excerpts and its consequences and legacy.

See the Library of Congress’ Web Guide

Connect with images. For example, this one or this one.

Admittedly, we focus on the reading of the document. There are several resources like the recent film National Treasure, the older film 1776, or the Independence episode of the recent TV miniseries John Adams that some teachers use to talk about the Declaration of Independence.

A new way to bring visual learners to the text of the Declaration is through YouTube. Your students may be interested in this video clip of well-known actors reading the Declaration in its entirety .

While these resources could be used to accompany the kinds of reading activities we mention here, it would be too bad if they trumped the actual Declaration, a document that talked about equality before our Constitution did and deserves every student’s eye.

Elizabeth Schaefer on the Interactive Declaration of Independence

Date Published
Image
Lithograph, The Declaration Committee, 1876, Currier and Ives, LoC
Lithograph, The Declaration Committee, 1876, Currier and Ives, LoC
Lithograph, The Declaration Committee, 1876, Currier and Ives, LoC
Article Body
The Library of Congress's Interactive Declaration of Independence

The Library of Congress has created a brilliant interactive tool for studying the Declaration of Independence in your classroom. It allows in-depth primary source research while lending itself naturally to reading skills and reinforcing good writing behavior. I explain some of the activities that I used, but there is a wide range of possibilities with this tool.

What is It?

The template for the computer interactive is a real rough draft of the Declaration of Independence, complete with edits made by Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin. On the "Overview" page, students can scroll their mouse over Thomas Jefferson's original script, transforming sections from the original handwriting to student-friendly printed font with word-processor-style edits.

The remaining tabs highlight specific concepts included in the Declaration (All Men Are Created Equal, Pursuit of Happiness, Consent of the Governed, Train of Abuses, and Slavery). For each section, four antecedent sources can be chosen which relate to the same concept and in some cases, use the same words.

Why Do I Love It?

Watching the Declaration warp time zones is equally thrilling for my students and me. It has a magical quality to it. Suddenly the students are excited about reading the Declaration of Independence! The interactive creates the best of both worlds—allowing students to see the original primary source but also helping them to understand it. Not only is the text teaching them history, but the visuals also prompt many critical questions:

They actually had to go back and rewrite this whole thing? What if Jefferson messed up writing at the very end—did he have to start all over? Did they have white-out? Did they use rulers? Where did they learn to write like that? Could everyone write like that?

Students see the handwriting of Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin and suddenly these old guys become real people.

Plus students see the handwriting of Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin and suddenly these old guys become real people. The students develop historic connections outside of the overt goals of the lesson, which I believe is the key to growing lifelong learners.

The interactive allows a range of lesson aims, a variety of historic analyses and skill levels, and a relevant and effective background for reading and writing support. The literacy skills and the focus are up to you but Jefferson is setting the example!

The interactive supports a range of lesson aims and a variety of historic analyses and skill levels, and makes a relevant and effective background for reading and writing extension activities. The literacy skills and the focus are up to you, but Jefferson is setting the example!

How Can I Use It in the Classroom?


My actual lesson included a three-page packet with very specific steps for the students. Below is a sampling of some activities that I used.

Primary Source Observations
The "Overview" page explains what the source is. Once students read this, you can ask a variety of questions about the document. You can use your typical observation format, but due to the large amount of information, I recommend that you select a more narrow focus.

For our initial observations, I asked the students to specifically pay attention to the edits made on page one. The students described what they thought the document was and then were asked about the type of edits.

Ex.: Which of the following did Thomas Jefferson do? (Check all that apply)

Changed words
Added words
Deleted words
Borrowed from other documents
Got peer edits. If so, from whom?

Identifying the Philosophy of Government
The next step was to discover the big ideas Thomas Jefferson communicates in the Declaration. This focused on the tabs labeled "Pursuit of Happiness," "Consent of the Governed," and "All Men are Created Equal," which highlight specific sentences from the document. The students filled in the sections with missing words or translated challenge vocabulary (CH). Note that the gray words are not included.

Ex.: "Consent of the Governed" section

Instituted = Made
Deriving = Getting
Consent = Permission

"that to secure these rights, ___________ [governments] are (CH) ___________ [instituted] among men, (CH) ___________ [deriving] their just powers from the (CH) ___________ [consent] of the governed."

Reading Support
These "Philosophy of Government" sections are ideal for supporting the reading area that your students are working on without confusing them by breaking the flow of your lesson. In my class, the students had to identify either the main idea of each section or Jefferson's purpose in including the sentence. They were therefore practicing testing skills in a way that was relevant and useful to our class. These sections can be applied to just about any reading skill "flavor-of-the-week."

Ex.: "Consent of the Governed" section

Who do you think "the governed" are?

What is Thomas Jefferson's purpose in using this sentence?

a. To inform the readers of how the king rules
b. To describe the Roman government
c. To explain how government should be
d. To support a monarchy government

Reviewing Content
In the next section, I instructed the students to view King George's offenses against the colonies by skimming pages two and three in the "Overview" section. The students' goal was to recognize the significant acts and events that we had discussed. They then recorded the section's specific passages mentioning taxation without representation, the Quartering Act, and the Boston Massacre Trials.

Advanced Source Comparisons
The Library of Congress selected specific reading and research material on Thomas Jefferson and paired it with the sections in the interactive Declaration of Independence. The reading was dense for the majority of my students, but I did ask, in the "All Men Are Created Equal" section, which of the documents they thought fit most closely with Jefferson's words.

The Other Side

On the top of page three, they were shocked to discover "merciless" and "savage."

Once the students are all settled on and happy that Jefferson believes "All Men Are Created Equal," we went backwards and looked a little closer. First, they were instructed to find the words Jefferson used about the American Indians in the text. On the top of page three, they were shocked to discover "merciless" and "savage."

Then we looked closer at the "Slavery" tab which describes the original words about slavery included in the draft of the Declaration of Independence, as well as the fact that they were all deleted. The students answered questions about which states were especially against including slavery and then they made connections. I closed with the questions, "Do you agree with the philosophy of government written in the Declaration of Independence?" and "Do you think the Continental Congress truly agreed with this philosophy of government?"

More Ideas?

If you develop new ways to use this interactive or have success with the Constitution version, please share your experience! I would love to hear some new ideas for this resource.

[Note: If you would like to respond to Liz Schaefer, comment to this entry, or email info@teachinghistory.org. We'll make sure she receives your feedback!]

For more information

HBO's miniseries John Adams includes a scene where Benjamin Franklin and John Adams edit Thomas Jefferson's rough draft of the Declaration, making some of the changes evident in the original draft. Remember to remind students that this scene was created based on the draft. We have no way of knowing exactly when or how the Founding Fathers discussed these changes.

Explore the Declaration on other websites with the National Archives and Records Administration's Our Documents or Charters of Freedom exhibits.

Film Review: John Adams

Date Published
Image
engraving, Vice-President John Adams, between 1850 and 1900,  John Singleton Cop
Article Body

"Facts are stubborn things." So said John Adams in his defense of the soldiers accused in the Boston massacre. Those words also serve as the title of the first episode of HBO's acclaimed film John Adams. Unfortunately, viewers familiar with Adams will find themselves immediately thrown off balance by dramatic renderings of "facts" that never happened. The film opens with Adams, awakened by an alarm, rushing through the streets of Boston. He finds bloody bodies strewn across a snow-covered square and a mob screaming that those responsible must be brought to justice. Offered a chance to enhance his reputation by defending the accused soldiers, Adams wrestles with the warning of his rabble-rousing cousin Samuel Adams that he must now choose sides in the emerging struggle. Adams defies his cousin and accepts the case. Unintimidated by a jeering gallery, he wins the soldiers' acquittal with an eloquent plea for justice: "Law is deaf as an adder to the cries of the populace." Success presents a new dilemma. Tempted by a royal official who dangles a lucrative place in the colonial legal system and enticed by the Sons of Liberty to run for office in Massachusetts, Adams renounces both options. "My family," he proclaims, "must take precedence." It is great theater. The virtuous and victorious citizen/farmer/lawyer returns home to his wife Abigail and their children.

Sadly, few of those details follow the record. Adams did not stumble upon the dead after the massacre or hear the crowd demand vengeance. He did not agonize about accepting the case, because he agreed immediately with the judicious Samuel Adams and other prominent dissidents that a spirited defense of the soldiers could only help those protesting British policy. Adams defended the soldiers by peppering high-minded reminders of the law's majesty with less elevated characterizations of the mob—including the part played by Indian/African American Crispus Attucks. Two of the soldiers were actually convicted of manslaughter in two separate trials. Finally, long before the massacre a British Satan had tried and failed to bribe Adams, who had already established himself—and been chosen for public office—as one of the most tenacious, effective, and visible of the colonists challenging Parliament's authority. Facts are indeed stubborn things.

Adams did not stumble upon the dead after the massacre or hear the crowd demand vengeance. He did not agonize about accepting the case....

Why does it matter? John Adams was a smashing success. It attracted a wide audience and won 13 Emmy awards, surpassing the revered Eleanor and Franklin (1976) and Roots (1977) to become the most honored historical drama ever shown on television. The producer Tom Hanks assembled an extraordinarily talented crew. The people responsible for the architecture, costumes, makeup, accents, lighting, music, and special effects deserve all the accolades they have received. Specialists will appreciate their meticulous attention to detail. Colonial Williamsburg is carefully transformed into various 18th-century settings. Estates in today's Hungary become European mansions in the 1780s and 1790s. Exact replicas constructed in rural Virginia recreate the Adams family's modest homes, which still exist in Quincy, MA. An amazing sound stage becomes, through the magic of supplemental computer-generated images, the town centers and waterfronts of Boston, Philadelphia, and Washington, DC.

In place of the typically glittering aristocratic worlds portrayed in dreamy films such as Barry Lyndon (1975), in which ostensibly authentic settings convey a grandeur unattainable in the early modern world, John Adams convincingly mixes mud and manure, bad wigs and worse teeth, and harrowing glimpses of 18th-century life and death. Viewers are unlikely to forget vivid depictions of the smallpox inoculations performed on Abigail and her children, the amputation of a sailor's leg on board the ship carrying John to France, and the surgery Benjamin Rush performed on John and Abigail's adult daughter Nabby in the vain hope that she might survive breast cancer. Yet such scenes skirt melodrama. The English director Tom Hooper presents with admirable restraint incidents that might have been overblown, such as the horrific tarring and feathering of a customs official by a Boston mob, the surprisingly carnal reunion of John and Abigail when, after a separation of three years, she at last joins him on his diplomatic mission in France, and the visit John pays his alcoholic son Charles in a New York City hovel. Exquisitely framed, lovingly detailed interior scenes conjure up images from paintings by Caravaggio, Chardin, Rembrandt, or Vermeer. The soundtrack juxtaposes popular, religious, and classical music from the period with a rousing score that lingers in memory. Considered solely as a piece of filmmaking, John Adams is a ringing success.

John Adams convincingly mixes mud and manure, bad wigs and worse teeth, and harrowing glimpses of 18th-century life and death.

Superb characterizations abound. Laura Linney infuses Abigail Adams with sublime—albeit iron-willed—patience. The nuances expressed by Linney's raised eyebrows, even more than the gradations in her faint but persistent smiles, will be seared in viewers' memories. Scolding, satisfying, and succoring her husband and their children, Linney's Abigail conveys passion, longing, and occasional anger with a range and subtlety worthy of the formidable Mrs. Adams. Tom Wilkinson plays Benjamin Franklin as a mischievous, wise wit who too often speaks in aphorisms and only occasionally descends into caricature. Through glances and quick quips rather than windy speeches, Stephen Delane's Thomas Jefferson effectively signals his aspirations and ambitions for America and France, politically outmaneuvers Adams and David Morse's regal but stiff George Washington, and effortlessly charms everyone. As John Dickinson and Edward Rutledge, Željko Ivanek and Clancy O'Connor avoid coming across in the dramatic debates over independence simply as appeasers or fops. Rufus Sewell captures Alexander Hamilton's sly shrewdness and yearning for personal as well as national greatness.

Like many who have written about the film, I wish the writer Kirk Ellis (who also wrote Into the West [2005]) and the actor Paul Giamatti had given us a less bipolar John Adams. Giamatti careens from raging bull to wounded puppy, rarely showing the qualities of heart and head that enabled Adams to write some of America's most powerful and enduring letters and works of political philosophy. Giamatti's John is all haughty bluster or pathetic self-pity, his character unalloyed by Abigail's endearing mercy and doubt, Franklin's hard-edged insight, or Jefferson's lofty if fuzzy vision.

Yet the extremes of Giamatti's characterization do make some sense. His contemporaries knew that Adams was obsessive, priggish, and intolerant. The film reminds us that the querulous are sometimes provoked and the vain can have reason to be proud. A couple of scenes from the film must suffice to illustrate how effectively it conveys Adams's bottomless self-righteousness. When the principal authors of the Declaration of Independence were together negotiating in France in 1779, Jefferson observed that Adams "hates Franklin, he hates Jay, he hates the French, he hates the English. To whom will he adhere?" Jefferson noted that "his vanity is a lineament in his character which had entirely escaped me. His want of taste I had observed." Yet Adams was blessed with a "sound head" and "integrity," Jefferson concluded, and his "dislike of all parties, and all men, by balancing his prejudices, may give the same fair play to his reason as would a general benevolence of temper." Franklin assessed his undiplomatic colleague more succinctly: Adams, he wrote, was "sometimes, and in some things, absolutely out of his senses."

Franklin assessed his undiplomatic colleague more succinctly: Adams, he wrote, was "sometimes, and in some things, absolutely out of his senses."

Without quoting those ungainly letters, John Adams nevertheless deftly captures their authors' complicated interactions. Viewers see how Adams's clumsy directness in sophisticated European society exasperates the cagey Franklin and amuses the smooth Jefferson. We encounter Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams together again in Europe in 1784, and we hear them debating the future of the republic in a series of sharp observations encapsulating their rival orientations. When Adams proclaims that the proposed federal constitution will bring to the struggling nation only the order that the state constitutions—including the one Adams himself gave Massachusetts—had effectively provided, Jefferson snaps that the plan would "close off revolution to reaction." When Jefferson complains that Adams distrusts the judgment of the people, Adams snorts that Jefferson has "excess faith" in their wisdom. Finally, when Abigail and John bid Jefferson goodbye, Adams says evenly that he will miss the Virginian's company, to which Jefferson replies quickly, "and I will miss yours, Mrs. Adams." All three laugh, but the point is made: "exceptional" and "charming" as Abigail found the cosmopolitan Jefferson, she and her stolid husband preferred each other's company and knew they were better suited to their simple Quincy farm than to the courts of Versailles and London—or to the rigors of political life in the new nation's capital, whether Philadelphia or Washington.

Viewers hear John tell his adolescent son John Quincy, reluctant to depart on a mission to Russia, that "there are times when we must act against our inclinations." Together with Abigail's insistence, that sense of duty impels John to accept the vice presidency, "the most insignificant office ever devised by the mind of man." Even the signal successes of his long career—making the case for independence in Boston and Philadelphia, negotiating a loan from Holland during the War for Independence, and avoiding a disastrous war with France during his presidency at the cost to his prestige and his political prospects—earn Adams little acclaim. The poignant scenes in which the defeated president prepares to vacate the still-unfinished White House, then leaves via public omnibus as "just plain John Adams, ordinary citizen, same as yourselves" (except that he vibrates with resentment), are pitch-perfect.

The film's generous use of [John and Abigail Adams's] correspondence, which testifies to one of the great love affairs of American history, ranks among its greatest strengths.

Capturing in seven episodes the complex sensibility of John Adams and the still greater complexity of late 18th-century American politics is impossible. Ellis's screenplay and Hooper's direction give us the best rendition yet on film. To give Giamatti his due, perhaps the success of John Adams derives from the relentless awkwardness of his portrayal. Unlike Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, or Hamilton, the cerebral, brooding Adams remained uneasy in the public eye. He craved fame and feared history would deny him his share of glory, yet he never cultivated the qualities that would have won him affection and esteem. John Adams remains as difficult to like as his "dearest friend" Abigail is impossible to resist.

The film communicates Abigail's loathing for "the sin of slavery" and exposes the tragic compromises of the founders that insured its poisonous persistence. Oddly, it omits her equally precocious attention to women's rights, her pointed counsel that those framing republican government should "remember the ladies," and her husband's uncharacteristically evasive and entirely unconvincing rejoinder. John's gruff truculence in the face of Abigail's wisdom makes Giamatti's and Linney's portrayal of their profound bond even more extraordinary. The film's generous use of their correspondence, which testifies to one of the great love affairs of American history, ranks among its greatest strengths.

With so many virtues, then, why should historians worry about the film's factual errors? Ellis has made clear that his research extended beyond the best-selling book by David McCullough on which the film claims to be based. Of course, consulting recent scholarship on the social history of the Revolution might have sharpened the edge of Jefferson's jibes about Adams's views of "the people," just as closer attention to Adams's Thoughts on Government (1776) might have showed the decisive role Adams played in the spring of 1776 to counterbalance Tom Paine's endorsement of unicameralism in Common Sense (1776). Historiographical debates, however much we historians relish them, are hard to capture, and texts do not make good television. Of course there are limits to what any film can do. But Ellis read enough to know that Adams did not have to break a tie over the Jay Treaty, an "invention" he justified on the grounds that Adams cast more decisive votes in the Senate than any other vice president has ever done; that Rush brokered Adams's reconciliation with Jefferson before, not after, Abigail's death; that Adams did not ride out to see the Battle of Concord, and so on.

Historians can understand why writers and directors want to place their principal figures in the thick of things.

Historians can understand why writers and directors want to place their principal figures in the thick of things. But avoiding or at least acknowledging such examples of poetic license might help guard against the cynical (and, in this case, largely unwarranted) assumption that films never get history right, or the increasingly common and even more unsettling assumption among Americans that facts do not really matter anyway. Just as computer-generated images can enrich battle scenes and make cityscapes more "authentic," supplemental material on DVDs can deepen historical understanding. The extra material on the John Adams DVDs, by contrast, includes only a few subtitles with relatively insignificant details that add little to the experience of watching the film a second time. Such subtitles could have clarified the on-screen action, added further information about persons and events, and acknowledged when the filmmakers were inventing incidents or altering evidence for dramatic purposes.

Responsible teachers will want their students to know when John Adams departs from the historical record....

Responsible teachers will want their students to know when John Adams departs from the historical record, just as they will want to explore debates over the crowd's role in the American Revolution, explain the importance of Adams's decisive essays from the 1760s and his later writings on the U.S. Constitution, and examine the nature of female sociability and family dynamics. Rich as the film is, the DVD could have made it even better—at least for historians and their students. The same technology that lets filmmakers present convincing images of a half-built Washington, DC, enables them to enrich teachers' and students' appreciation of what historical dramas can and cannot do. Making the most of that technology could sharpen students' awareness of the unbridgeable gap between the vivid, unambiguous images on the screen and the documentary record with its inevitable omissions, its enchanting ambiguities, and its stubborn facts.

Bibliography

This review was first published in the Journal of American History, 95(3) (2008): 937–940. Reprinted with permission from the Organization of American Historians (OAH).

Picturing the American Revolution

Image
Photography, Yorktown Cannon, 23 April 2003, DanRhett, Flickr CC
Question

If you had to choose five picture books for early U.S. History what would these books be? Also, this would be for urban 5th graders who have not had Social Studies and tend to score very low on standardized reading tests.

Answer

My answer to your question will be based on the following assumptions:

  1. By “early U.S. history” you are referring to the American Revolution.
  2. You will use the picture books as read aloud and possibly incorporate an ELA writing activity after the read aloud.
  3. Both fiction and nonfiction books may be used.
  4. The order of the list does not give precedence to one book over another.
  5. It’s impossible to choose only five books!

Enjoy!

Here are some suggestions for the American Revolution:

  1. Boston Tea Party by Pamela Duncan Edwards: This book sets the stage for the Revolution. Students will gain an understanding as to why the colonists were upset with the British king and took such action. The book offers a clear and concise explanation of the causes and effects of the Boston Tea Party while providing a humorous touch with mice conversing at the bottom of each page. Their chattering provides a simplified version of the events reaching students who might find too many details overwhelming.
  2. ELA writing piece: Have students write a friendly letter to a family member in England explaining why they are upset.

  3. Let It Begin Here- Lexington & Concord—First Battles of the American Revolution by Dennis Brindell Fradin: A timeline of events is depicted for the first 24 hours of the American Revolution. Students will gain an overview of that fateful day. As the date and time that appears at the top of each page is read aloud, students will sense how quickly the events unraveled. It would be fun to give each student a paper clock and have them move the hands as the time is reported. They could use their math skills to determine how much time has passed between events.

    ELA writing piece: Have students rewrite history. Students will change one event and write how it could have changed our history.

  4. Sybil’s Night Ride by Karen B. Winnick: Not only Paul Revere rode to announce the British were coming, so did Sybil Ludington. Students will relate to the heroism of a peer and enjoy hearing about someone their age performing a heroic deed similar to that of Paul Revere. After the reading the class could discuss the characteristics of a hero.
  5. ELA writing piece: Have students write a paragraph about a contemporary hero.

  6. When Washington Crossed the Delaware by Lynne Cheney: A detailed depiction of Washington’s attack on Trenton. Students should take notes on the hardships faced by the colonial army. After reading and discussing these, the teacher could show students the famous 1851 painting of Washington crossing the Delaware and ask them how the artist’s depiction is not historically accurate. Students will enjoy finding the “mistakes.” They should be ready to answer this question, “If a photograph had been taken what would we see?” Students could even draw their interpretation.
  7. ELA writing piece: Have students write a character sketch of Washington. What made him such a great leader? Use details from the story.

  8. The Scarlet Stockings Spy by Trinka Hakes Noble: A young girl in Philadelphia, 1777, helps Washington’s army by spying on the British. The order in which she hangs laundry is a code and secretly read by her brother who is a spy for the Patriots. Students will like the suspense of the story and notice that even though women may not be on the battlefield, they served in meaningful ways on the home front.
  9. ELA writing piece: Have students retell the story in modern time using current technology that mirrors the actions taken by Maddy Rose in 1777.

  10. The Declaration of Independence—The Words that Made America by Sam Fink: The words of the Declaration are written phrase by phrase. Instead of reading aloud, the teacher could give pairs of students a phrase to rewrite in their own words and then explain to the class. The teacher should first model one phrase for the class. Students will gain a true understanding of what this document is saying. For students who have only seen small mock versions of the document, they will find that the larger than life font size brings the words to life. The cartoon-like illustrations with bubble captions will also appeal to this age group.
For more information

Books for students who would like to discover more on their own:

  1. Why Not Lafayette? by Jean Fritz: Readable biography of Lafayette for a 5th grader.
  2. Paul Revere’s Ride by Xavier Niz: A graphic rendition of the famous ride.
  3. Twice a Hero by Dirk Wales: Tells the story of Polish American heroes of the Revolution.
  4. Now & Ben—The Modern Inventions of Benjamin Franklin by Gene Barretta: Connects Ben Franklin to our lives today.

Look for more ideas here, where you will find books for the K-12 classroom that have been designated as notable by social studies teachers who are members of the National Council for the Social Studies.

Interpreting the Declaration of Independence by Translation

Image
Logo, Interpreting the Declaration of Independence by Translation
Annotation

The complex practice of translating historical documents is explored in this site that provides 11 historical translations of the American Declaration of Independence into Behasa Melayu (Malay language), French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Polish, Russian, and Spanish, along with 16 essays (2,500 to 10,000 words) that discuss these and other translations. The site reproduces a Journal of American History roundtable, published in March 1999, and includes introductory essays that discuss the endeavor of placing American history into a transnational perspective. Of great interest are five "'naive' retranslations back into English so that those who don't know the different languages can get a sense of how some key concepts and words have been rendered." This site is of great value not only for those interested in the new field of translation studies, but for all historians and students concerned with the importance of linguistic issues for historical interpretation.

Freedom Trail Foundation

Image
Detail, home page
Annotation

Dedicated in 1958 and now host to thousands of tourists annually, Boston's Freedom Trail links together 16 historic sites from the Revolutionary War era on a 2.5-mile red brick walking trail. This website provides a virtual tour of these sites and other resources devoted to visiting and teaching about the Freedom Trail.

Users may want to begin by downloading the detailed map of the Freedom Trail, and then, with that in hand, visiting the website's "Visit the Freedom Trail" section, which provides images and descriptions of the Trail's 16 sites, including the Boston Common, King's Chapel, Old South Meeting House, and the Old North Church, the oldest standing church building in Boston, and where church sexton Robert Newman hung two lanterns on April 18, 1775, to signal the advance of the British up the Charles River. Additional biographical information is provided for 30 18th-century citizens from all walks of life affected by the events of the Revolutionary War in Boston.

Educators may be interested in the website's teaching materials, including articles on teaching aspects of the Revolutionary era, as well as information on visiting the Trail with students and booking in-school history education programs geared towards students in the upper elementary grades.