our men were instantly killed and wounded, not a gun was fired by any person in our company
on the British soldiers to our knowledge before they fired on us, and continued firing until we
had all made our escape.
Lexington, April 25, 1775.
Questions:
1. Sourcing: What kind of document is this? Do you trust it more or less than a diary entry? When was this written? Whose side does this document represent?
2. Close reading: What is the significance of the phrase “to our knowledge?”
3. Corroboration: Where do Barker’s and Mullikan’s accounts disagree? Are there any facts that
both accounts agree on?
Battle of Lexington Engraving - Amos Doolittle
Source: One of four engravings made by Amos Doolittle in 1775. Doolittle was an engraver and silversmith from Connecticut who visited the site of the battle and interviewed participants and witnesses. (Figure 3.1.
Questions:
1. Sourcing: When was this document created? By whom? For what purpose?
23
Figure 3.1: One of four engravings made by Amos Doolittle in 1775
2. Which figures in this image are British? Which figures are American? How can you tell?
3. Look closely at the image. Which side appears to be firing first?
Terrence Blachaux Painting
Source: A painting made by Terrence Blachaux in 1859, which was used in a 19th Century American postage stamp. (Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2: Century American postage stamp.
Questions:
1. Sourcing: When was this image created? By whom? For what purpose?
2. According to this image, who fired first?
Section Questions:
1. Corroboration: Which of the first two texts seems more reliable—Mullikan or Barker? Why might they differ?
2. Corroboration: Which of the images probably presents a more accurate representation of the Battle of Lexington?
3. Why might the creator of the other image have wanted to portray the battle differently?
24
3.3 The Declaration of Independence
Declaration of Independence
Source: The Declaration of Independence is a statement approved by representatives of the 13 colonies.
The representatives, called the Continental Congress, met in Philadelphia. The Declaration was adopted on July 4, 1776. (Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3: Declaration of Independence
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit
of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving
their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government
becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to
institute new government.
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated abuses intended to
establish tyranny over the colonies. To prove this, let facts be submitted:
(1 & 2) He has refused to pass, and forbidden his governors to pass, important and necessary
laws.
(3 & 4) He has insisted that certain large districts give up their right to representation; in other districts, he has insisted that the legislature meet in uncomfortable, and distant places, so that
they won’t oppose him.
(5 & 6) He has broken up certain legislatures that opposed him, and refused to let others be
elected.
(8 & 9) He has refused to establish courts of justice, and has made judges dependent on him
for their jobs and salaries.
(10) He has sent swarms of British officers to harass our people and eat our food.
(11 & 12) He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, without the consent of
our legislatures; he has tried to make the military independent of, and superior to, the local,
civil power.
25
(14 & 15) For keeping large bodies of armed troops among us; For protecting them, by a mock
trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the colonists;
(16) For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world;
(17) For imposing taxes on us without our consent;
(18) For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury;
(21) For abolishing our most valuable laws, and fundamentally changing the forms of our
governments;
(23 & 24) He is waging war against us; He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned
our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
(27) He has started fights among us and has also forced us to live near merciless Indian savages,
who only destroy all ages, sexes, and conditions.
(28) He has ignored all of our humble efforts to address these problems.
Vocabulary
self-evident obvious
endowed given
inalienable cannot be taken away
to secure to get
instituted established
deriving getting
consent agreement
Questions
For questions 1 and 2, restate the indicated paragraph in your own words.
1. We believe in these obvious truths: that all men are created equal, that they....
2. In order to protect these rights, governments are set up. These governments get their powers from....
3. Close Reading: Do these grievances seem to be things that upset rich people, or both rich and poor?
4. Do you think these complaints would give people reason to go to war and possibly die? Why or why
not?
The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution – Bernard
Bailyn
Source: Excerpt from a book by historian Bernard Bailyn. The book, published in 1967, is called The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution.
26
The Declaration of Independence represents the colonists’ deepest fears and beliefs.
The
colonists believed they saw a clear pattern in the events that followed 1763. They believed
they saw an evil and deliberate conspiracy to crush liberty in America. They saw evidence of
this conspiracy in the Stamp Act and in the Coercive Acts.
They also believed that America was destined to play a special role in history. They believed
that America would become “the foundation of a great and mighty empire, the largest the world
ever saw to be founded on such principles of liberty and freedom, both civil and religious.” The
colonists believed that England was trying to enslave them, and that they should use “all the
power which God has given them” to protect themselves.
Questions:
1. Close Reading: What does Bailyn think the Declaration of Independence represents? What evi-
dence does he use to support his claims?
A People’s History of the United States - Howard Zinn
Source: Excerpt from A People’s History of the United States, which was published in 1980 by historian Howard Zinn.
It seemed clear to the educated, upper-class colonists that something needed to be done to per-
suade the lower class to join the revolutionary cause, to direct their anger against England. The
solution was to find language inspiring to all classes, specific enough in its listing of grievances
to fill people with anger against the British, vague enough to avoid class conflict, and stirring
enough to build patriotic feelings.
Everything the Declaration of Independence was about – popular control over governments,
the right of rebellion and revolution, fury at political tyranny, economic burdens, and military
attacks – was well suited to unite large numbers of colonists and persuade even those who had
grievances against one another to turn against England.
Some Americans were clearly omitted from those united by the Declaration of Independence:
Indians, black slaves, and women.
Questions:
1. Close Reading: What does Zinn think the Declaration of Independence represents? What evidence does he use to support his claims?
Section Questions:
1. Which historian, Bailyn or Zinn, do you find more convincing? Why?
27
3.4 Loyalists during the Revolution
Loyalist Letter – Anonymous
Source: The following letter was written by an anonymous Loyalist under the pseudonym ‘Rusticus’. Printed in a Pennsylvania newspaper, it lists all the advantages of being British.
Pennsylvania Packet January 2, 1775
My Friends and Countrymen,
This howling wilderness has been converted into a flourishing and populous country. But, is
this not due to the way in which the colonies have been treated from the beginning? Isn’t our
growth a result of Great Britain’s willingness to encourage our industry and protect us from
foreign countries? If so, surely some degree of gratitude, such as becomes a free and liberal
people, would be appropriate.
The peace and security we have already enjoyed under Great Britain’s protection, before the
mistaken system of taxation took place, must make us look back with regret to those happy
days whose loss we mourn, and which every rational man must consider as the golden age of
America.
Let us then, my friends and countrymen, be patient and avoid all inflammatory publications that
are disrespectful to our most gracious Sovereign. Let us look forward to a happy termination
of our present disputes, and a cordial reconciliation with our mother country.
Rusticus
Vocabulary
Flourishing rapidly growing
Rational reasonable
Inflammatory arousing violent feelings
Cordial warm and friendly
Reconciliation existing in harmony
Loyalist Letter – Charles Inglis
Source: The following letter was written by Reverend Charles Inglis, an Anglican minister. He was trying to sway colonists not to follow the Patriot leaders who were leading Americans into war.
New York Gazette September 19, 1774
To the Inhabitants of North America:
Brethren, Friends and Fellow Subjects,
In case these people in Massachusetts succeed in convincing other colonies to break from Great
Britain, let us calmly consider how prepared we are for such a war. I will not exaggerate, but
represent things as they really are.
28
The naval power of Great Britain is the greatest in the world. Do we have a fleet to look this
power in the face and defend our coasts? No—not one ship. The inevitable consequence then
must be, that all our seaport towns will be taken and all our trade and commerce destroyed.
Have we disciplined troops to encounter those British soldiers that are now in America, or that
may be sent here?—Not a single regiment. We will need to leave our farms, our shops, our
trades and begin to learn the art of war at the very same time we are called to practice it. And EVERYTHING will be at stake.
If we turn our eyes west to our back-country the situation is no better. Every man in Canada
is a soldier, and may be commanded whenever government pleases. Then, add the Indians,
whose warriors in Canada and the Six Nations amount to at least FIVE THOUSAND. In the
case of our civil war with Britain, all these Canadians and Indians would be let loose on our
back-settlements, to scalp, ravage and lay everything to waste.
Shall we, then, madly pursue violent measures that will plunge our country into all the horrors
of a civil war? Shall we desperately risk our lives, liberties and property and recklessly drench
this happy country with the blood of its inhabitants? –Forbid it humanity! Forbid it loyalty,
reason and common sense!
A New York Freeholder (landowner)
3.5 Shays’s Rebellion
In 1881, the colonies adopted the Articles of Confederation—a document that bound them into the United States of America. Since the colonists were fighting to free themselves from monarchical rule, they created a very weak central government. Under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government could not
tax, could not make laws that would be binding in all 13 states, had no executive branch, and could not raise a national army.
Shays’s Rebellion was a violent protest held by farmers in western Massachusetts. You will learn more
about it by reading the first document below, an excerpt from a recent U.S. History textbook. According to the textbook, Shays’s Rebellion made Americans realize that they needed a stronger government. As
you read that documents that follow, try to understand the connection between Shays’s Rebellion and
the Articles of Confederation and then determine whether all Americans drew the same lessons from the
Rebellion.
Shays’s Rebellion – The American Vision
Source: An account of Shays’s Rebellion excerpted from The American Vision, a high school U.S. History textbook published in 2003.
Shay’s Rebellion
The property owners’ fears seemed justified when a full-scale rebellion, known as Shays’s
Rebellion, erupted in Massachusetts in 1786. The rebellion started when the government of
Massachusetts decided to raise taxes instead of issuing paper money to pay off its debts. The
taxes fell most heavily on farmers, particularly poor farmers in the western part of the state. As
the recession grew worse, many found it impossible to pay their taxes as well as their mortgages
and other debts. Those who could not pay often faced the loss of their farms.
Angry at the legislature’s indifference to their plight, in late August 1786, farmers in western
Massachusetts rebelled. They closed down several county courthouses to prevent farm foreclo-
sures, and then marched on the state supreme court. At this point, Daniel Shays, a former
29
captain in the Continental Army who was now a bankrupt farmer, emerged as one of the
rebellion’s leaders.
In January 1787, Shays and about 1, 200 farmers headed to a state arsenal intending to seize
weapons before marching on Boston. In response, the governor sent more than 4, 000 volunteers
under the command of General Benjamin Lincoln to defend the arsenal. Before they arrived,
Shays attacked, and the militia defending the arsenal opened fire. Four farmers died in the
fighting. The rest scattered. The next day Lincoln’s troops arrived and ended the rebellion.
The fears the rebellion had raised, however, were harder to disperse.
A Call for Change
People with greater income and social status tended to see the rebellion, as well as inflation
and an unstable currency, as signs that the republic itself was at risk. They feared that as
state legislatures became more democratic and responsive to poor people, they would weaken
property rights and vote to take property from the wealthy. As General Henry Knox, a close
aide to George Washington, concluded: “What is to afford our security against the violence
of lawless men? Our government must be braced, changed, or altered to secure our lives and
property.”
These concerns were an important reason why many people, including merchants, artisans,
and creditors, began to argue for a stronger central government, and several members of the
Confederation Congress called on the states to correct “such defects as may be discovered to
exist” in the present government. The confederation’s failure to deal with conditions that might
lead to rebellion, as well as the problems with trade and diplomacy, only added fuel to their
argument.
Questions:
1. Sourcing: What kind of document is this? When was it written?
2. Close Reading: According to this document, how was Shays’s rebellion related to the Articles of Confederation?
3. Close Reading: According to this document, how did people respond to Shays’s Rebellion?
Thomas Jefferson on Shays’ Rebellion
Source: Thomas Jefferson was in France during Shays’ Rebellion, but he wrote a letter to a friend about it.
Paris, November 13, 1787
The British have so long hired their newspapers to repeat every form lies about our being in
anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, and we have believed them ourselves. Yet
where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Shays’
rebellion? God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion.
What country before ever existed without a rebellion? And what country can preserve its
liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit
of resistance? Let the people take arms. The remedy is to present them with the facts, pardon
and pacify them.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It
is its natural manure. Our Constitutional Convention has [made too much of Shays’ rebellion]:
and in the spur of the moment [I believe they are over-reacting].
30
Vocabulary
Anarchy chaos;confusion and disorder
Remedy cure
Pardon forgive
Pacify calm down
Manure fertilizer
Questions:
1. Sourcing: Who wrote this document? What else do you know about his views on a strong central government?
2. Contextualization: According to Jefferson, have the colonies been peaceful or chaotic? Support your answer with evidence from the document.
3. Close Reading: What does Jefferson mean when he says “The tree of liberty must be refreshed
from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants?”
Section Questions
1. Opening Up the Textbook: How does this document challenge or expand the information you
read in the textbook?
3.6 Federalists and Anti-Federalists
In 1787, the states sent delegates to the Constitutional Convention, where they debated and wrote the
new Constitution. Two camps developed— Federalists who favored a strong central government and Anti-Federalists, who favored a weak one. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, were strongest among Northerners, city dwellers, and merchants. The Anti-Federalists, including Thomas Jefferson, included
more Southerners and farmers. The documents below show the Federalist and Anti-Federalist positions on Congressional representation and the impact of the new Constitution upon the states.
Federalist Position on Congressional Representation – Alexander
Hamilton
Source: Speech by Alexander Hamilton, June 21, 1788
The Antifederalists seem to think that a pure democracy would be the perfect government. Ex-
perience has shown that this idea is false. The ancient democracies of Greece were characterized
by tyranny and run by mobs.
The Antifederalists also argue that a large representation is necessary to understand the inter-
ests of the people. This is not true. Why can’t someone understand thirty [thousand] people
as well as he understands twenty people?
31
The new constitution does not make a rich man more eligible for an elected office than a poor
person. I also think it’s dangerous to assume that men become more wicked as they gain wealth
and education. Look at all the people in a community, the rich and the poor, the educated
and the ignorant. Which group has higher moral standards? Both groups engage in immoral
or wicked behavior. But it would seem to me that the wealthy overall have the advantage.
Their immoral behavior often benefits the general wealth of the country, and it’s less wicked
and sinful.
Question:
1. What type of Congressional representation did the federalists prefer? Why?
Anti-Federalist Position on Representation in Congress – Melanc-
ton Smith
Source: Speech by Melancton Smith, delivered June 21, 1788.
Representatives should be a true picture of the people. They should understand their circum-
stances and their troubles. Therefore, the number of representatives should be so large that
both rich and poor people will choose to be representatives.
If the number of representatives is small, the position will be too competitive. Ordinary people
will not attempt to run for office. A middle-class yeoman (farmer) will never be chosen. So,
the government will fall into the hands of the few and the rich. This will be a government of
oppression.
The rich consider themselves above the common people, entitled to more respect. They believe
they have the right to get anything they want.
Questions:
1. What kind of Congressional representation did the Anti-Federalists favor? Why?
Section Question:
1. Which argument do you find more convincing, Federalist or Anti-Federalist?
Federalist Position on State/Federal Power – Alexander Hamil-
ton
Source: Speech given by Alexander Hamilton, June 28, 1788
The Antifederalists argue that the federal government should not be allowed to tax the people
because it will take everything it can get.
It is unfair to presume that the representatives of the people will be tyrants in the federal
government, but not in the state government. If we are convinced that the federal government
will pass laws that go against the interests of the people, then we should have no federal
government at all. But if we unite, we can accomplish great things.
32
I must finally say that I resent the implication that I am only interested in rank and power.
What reasonable man would establish a system that would reduce his friends and children to
slavery and ruin?
No reasonable man would want to establish a government that is unfriendly to the liberty of
the people. Do not assume, gentlemen, that the advocates of this Constitution are motivated
by their ambition. It is an unjust and uncharitable view.
Question:
1. Did the Federalists want the states or the Federal government to have more power? Why?
Antifederalist Position on State/Federal Power - Melancton Smith
Source: Speech given by Melancton Smith on June 27, 1788.
In a country where most people live more than twelve hundred miles from the center, I don’t
think one [government] body can legislate for the whole. Can such a government design a
system of taxation that will be beneficial for everyone?
Won’t such a centralized taxation system lead to swarms of officers, infesting our country and