essay on the boston massacre

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Boston Massacre

By: History.com Editors

Updated: June 24, 2024 | Original: October 27, 2009

The Boston Massacre was a deadly riot that occurred on March 5, 1770, on King Street in Boston. It began as a street brawl between American colonists and a lone British soldier, but quickly escalated to a chaotic, bloody slaughter. The conflict energized anti-British sentiment and paved the way for the American Revolution.

Why Did the Boston Massacre Happen?

Tensions ran high in Boston in early 1770. More than 2,000 British soldiers occupied the city of 16,000 colonists and tried to enforce Britain’s tax laws, like the Stamp Act and Townshend Acts . American colonists rebelled against the taxes they found repressive, rallying around the cry, “no taxation without representation.”

Skirmishes between colonists and soldiers—and between patriot colonists and colonists loyal to Britain (loyalists)—were increasingly common. To protest taxes, patriots often vandalized stores selling British goods and intimidated store merchants and their customers.

On February 22, a mob of patriots attacked a known loyalist’s store. Customs officer Ebenezer Richardson lived near the store and tried to break up the rock-pelting crowd by firing his gun through the window of his home. His gunfire struck and killed an 11-year-old boy named Christopher Seider and further enraged the patriots.

Several days later, a fight broke out between local workers and British soldiers. It ended without serious bloodshed but helped set the stage for the bloody incident yet to come.

How Many Died After Violence Erupted?

On the frigid, snowy evening of March 5, 1770, Private Hugh White was the only soldier guarding the King’s money stored inside the Custom House on King Street. It wasn’t long before angry colonists joined him and insulted him and threatened violence.

At some point, White fought back and struck a colonist with his bayonet. In retaliation, the colonists pelted him with snowballs, ice and stones. Bells started ringing throughout the town—usually a warning of fire—sending a mass of male colonists into the streets. As the assault on White continued, he eventually fell and called for reinforcements.

In response to White’s plea and fearing mass riots and the loss of the King’s money, Captain Thomas Preston arrived on the scene with several soldiers and took up a defensive position in front of the Custom House.

Worried that bloodshed was inevitable, some colonists reportedly pleaded with the soldiers to hold their fire as others dared them to shoot. Preston later reported a colonist told him the protestors planned to “carry off [White] from his post and probably murder him.”

The violence escalated, and the colonists struck the soldiers with clubs and sticks. Reports differ of exactly what happened next, but after someone supposedly said the word “fire,” a soldier fired his gun, although it’s unclear if the discharge was intentional.

Once the first shot rang out, other soldiers opened fire, killing five colonists–including Crispus Attucks , a local dockworker of mixed racial heritage–and wounding six. Among the other casualties of the Boston Massacre was Samuel Gray, a rope maker who was left with a hole the size of a fist in his head. Sailor James Caldwell was hit twice before dying, and Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr were mortally wounded.  

7 Events That Enraged Colonists and Led to the American Revolution

Colonists didn't just take up arms against the British out of the blue. A series of events escalated tensions that culminated in America's war for independence.

8 Things We Know About Crispus Attucks

Crispus Attucks, a multiracial man who had escaped slavery, is known as the first American colonist killed in the American Revolution.

Did a Snowball Fight Start the American Revolution?

On a cold night in Boston in 1770, angry colonists pelted a lone British sentry with snowballs. The rest is history.

Boston Massacre Fueled Anti-British Views

Within hours, Preston and his soldiers were arrested and jailed and the propaganda machine was in full force on both sides of the conflict.

Preston wrote his version of the events from his jail cell for publication, while Sons of Liberty leaders such as John Hancock and Samuel Adams incited colonists to keep fighting the British. As tensions rose, British troops retreated from Boston to Fort William.

Paul Revere encouraged anti-British attitudes by etching a now-famous engraving depicting British soldiers callously murdering American colonists. It showed the British as the instigators though the colonists had started the fight.

It also portrayed the soldiers as vicious men and the colonists as gentlemen. It was later determined that Revere had copied his engraving from one made by Boston artist Henry Pelham.

John Adams Defends the British

It took seven months to arraign Preston and the other soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre and bring them to trial. Ironically, it was American colonist, lawyer and future President of the United States John Adams who defended them.

Adams was no fan of the British but wanted Preston and his men to receive a fair trial. After all, the death penalty was at stake and the colonists didn’t want the British to have an excuse to even the score. Certain that impartial jurors were nonexistent in Boston, Adams convinced the judge to seat a jury of non-Bostonians.

During Preston’s trial, Adams argued that confusion that night was rampant. Eyewitnesses presented contradictory evidence on whether Preston had ordered his men to fire on the colonists.

But after witness Richard Palmes testified that, “…After the Gun went off I heard the word ‘fire!’ The Captain and I stood in front about half between the breech and muzzle of the Guns. I don’t know who gave the word to fire,” Adams argued that reasonable doubt existed; Preston was found not guilty.

The remaining soldiers claimed self-defense and were all found not guilty of murder. Two of them—Hugh Montgomery and Matthew Kilroy—were found guilty of manslaughter and were branded on the thumbs as first offenders per English law.

To Adams’ and the jury’s credit, the British soldiers received a fair trial despite the vitriol felt towards them and their country.

Aftermath of the Boston Massacre

The Boston Massacre had a major impact on relations between Britain and the American colonists. It further incensed colonists already weary of British rule and unfair taxation and roused them to fight for independence.

Yet perhaps Preston said it best when he wrote about the conflict and said, “None of them was a hero. The victims were troublemakers who got more than they deserved. The soldiers were professionals…who shouldn’t have panicked. The whole thing shouldn’t have happened.”

Over the next five years, the colonists continued their rebellion and staged the Boston Tea Party , formed the First Continental Congress and defended their militia arsenal at Concord against the redcoats, effectively launching the American Revolution . Today, the city of Boston has a Boston Massacre site marker at the intersection of Congress Street and State Street, a few yards from where the first shots were fired.

After the Boston Massacre. John Adams Historical Society. Boston Massacre Trial. National Park Service: National Historical Park of Massachusetts. Paul Revere’s Engraving of the Boston Massacre, 1770. The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. The Boston Massacre. Bostonian Society Old State House. The Boston “Massacre.” H.S.I. Historical Scene Investigation.

HISTORY Vault: The American Revolution

Stream American Revolution documentaries and your favorite HISTORY series, commercial-free.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions

The killing of Christopher Seider and the end of the rope

From mob to “massacre”.

• Aftermath and agitprop

What was the Boston Massacre?

Why did the boston massacre happen.

• What are the American colonies?
• Who established the American colonies?
• What pushed the American colonies toward independence?

Boston Massacre

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Bill of Rights Institute - The Boston Massacre
• National Park Service - Boston Massacre
• Khan Academy - The Boston Massacre
• The Ohio State University - Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective - The Boston Massacre
• Teach Democracy - The Boston Massacre
• World History Encyclopedia - Boston Massacre
• Colonial America - Boston Massacre Facts
• Alpha History - The Boston Massacre
• American Battlefield Trust - The Boston Massacre
• Public Broadcasting Service - Africans in America - The Boston Massacre
• Boston Massacre - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• Boston Massacre - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

The incident was the climax of growing unrest in Boston , fueled by colonists’ opposition to a series of acts passed by the British Parliament . Especially unpopular was an act that raised revenue through duties on lead, glass, paper, paint, and tea. On March 5, 1770, a crowd confronted eight British soldiers in the streets of the city. As the mob insulted and threatened them, the soldiers fired their muskets, killing five colonists.

In 1767 the British Parliament passed the Townshend Acts , designed to exert authority over the colonies. One of the acts placed duties on various goods, and it proved particularly unpopular in Massachusetts . Tensions began to grow, and in Boston in February 1770 a patriot mob attacked a British loyalist, who fired a gun at them, killing a boy. In the ensuing days brawls between colonists and British soldiers eventually culminated in the Boston Massacre.

Why was the Boston Massacre important?

The incident and the trials of the British soldiers, none of whom received prison sentences, were widely publicized and drew great outrage. The events contributed to the unpopularity of the British regime in much of colonial North America and helped lead to the American Revolution .

Boston Massacre , (March 5, 1770), skirmish between British troops and a crowd in Boston , Massachusetts . Widely publicized, it contributed to the unpopularity of the British regime in much of colonial North America in the years before the American Revolution .

In 1767, in an attempt to recoup the considerable treasure expended in the defense of its North American colonies during the French and Indian War (1754–63), the British Parliament enacted strict provisions for the collection of revenue duties in the colonies. Those duties were part of a series of four acts that became known as the Townshend Acts , which also were intended to assert Parliament’s authority over the colonies, in marked contrast to the policy of salutary neglect that had been practiced by the British government during the early to mid-18th century. The imposition of those duties—on lead, glass, paper, paint, and tea upon their arrival in colonial ports—met with angry opposition from many colonists in Massachusetts. In addition to organized boycotts of those goods, the colonial response took the form of harassment of British officials and vandalism. Parliament answered British colonial authorities’ request for protection by dispatching the 14th and 29th regiments of the British army to Boston, where they arrived in October 1768. The presence of those troops, however, heightened the tension in an already anxious environment .

Early in 1770, with the effectiveness of the boycott uneven, colonial radicals, many of them members of the Sons of Liberty , began directing their ire against those businesses that had ignored the boycott. The radicals posted signs (large hands emblazoned with the word importer ) on the establishments of boycott-violating merchants and berated their customers. On February 22, when Ebenezer Richardson, who was known to the radicals as an informer, tried to take down one of those signs from the shop of his neighbour Theophilus Lillie, he was set upon by a group of boys. The boys drove Richardson back into his own nearby home, from which he emerged to castigate his tormentors, drawing a hail of stones that broke Richardson’s door and front window. Richardson and George Wilmont, who had come to his defense, armed themselves with muskets and accosted the boys who had entered Richardson’s backyard. Richardson fired, hitting 11-year-old Christopher Seider (or Snyder or Snider; sources differ on his last name), who died later that night. Seemingly, only the belief that Richardson would be brought to justice in court prevented the crowd from taking immediate vengeance upon him.

With tensions running high in the wake of Seider’s funeral, brawls broke out between soldiers and rope makers in Boston’s South End on March 2 and 3. On March 4 British troops searched the rope works owned by John Gray for a sergeant who was believed to have been murdered. Gray, having heard that British troops were going to attack his workers on Monday, March 5, consulted with Col. William Dalrymple, the commander of the 14th Regiment. Both men agreed to restrain those in their charge, but rumours of an imminent encounter flew.

On the morning of March 5 someone posted a handbill ostensibly from the British soldiers promising that they were determined to defend themselves. That night a crowd of Bostonians roamed the streets, their anger fueled by rumours that soldiers were preparing to cut down the so-called Liberty Tree (an elm tree in what was then South Boston from which effigies of men who had favoured the Stamp Act had been hung and on the trunk of which was a copper-plated sign that read “The Tree of Liberty”) and that a soldier had attacked an oysterman. One element of the crowd stormed the barracks of the 29th Regiment but was repulsed. Bells rang out an alarm and the crowd swelled , but the soldiers remained in their barracks, though the crowd pelted the barracks with snowballs. Meanwhile, the single sentry posted outside the Customs House became the focus of the rage for a crowd of 50–60 people. Informed of the sentry’s situation by a British sympathizer, Capt. Thomas Preston marched seven soldiers with fixed bayonets through the crowd in an attempt to rescue the sentry. Emboldened by the knowledge that the Riot Act had not been read—and that the soldiers could not fire their weapons until it had been read and then only if the crowd failed to disperse within an hour—the crowd taunted the soldiers and dared them to shoot (“provoking them to it by the most opprobrious language,” according to Thomas Gage , commander in chief of the British army in America). Meanwhile, they pelted the troops with snow, ice, and oyster shells.

In the confusion, one of the soldiers, who were then trapped by the patriot mob near the Customs House, was jostled and, in fear, discharged his musket . Other soldiers, thinking they had heard the command to fire, followed suit. Three crowd members—including Crispus Attucks , a Black sailor who likely was formerly enslaved—were shot and died almost immediately. Two of the eight others who were wounded died later. Hoping to prevent further violence, Lieut. Gov. Thomas Hutchinson , who had been summoned to the scene and arrived shortly after the shooting had taken place, ordered Preston and his contingent back to their barracks, where other troops had their guns trained on the crowd. Hutchinson then made his way to the balcony of the Old State House, from which he ordered the other troops back into the barracks and promised the crowd that justice would be done, calming the growing mob and bringing an uneasy peace to the city.

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Course: US history   >   Unit 3

• The Seven Years' War: background and combatants
• The Seven Years' War: battles and legacy
• Seven Years' War: lesson overview
• Seven Years' War
• Pontiac's uprising
• Uproar over the Stamp Act
• The Townshend Acts and the committees of correspondence

The Boston Massacre

• Prelude to revolution
• The Boston Tea Party
• The Intolerable Acts and the First Continental Congress
• Lexington and Concord
• The Second Continental Congress
• The Declaration of Independence
• Women in the American Revolution
• The American Revolution

• Boston, Massachusetts was a hotbed of radical revolutionary thought and activity leading up to 1770.
• In March 1770, British soldiers stationed in Boston opened fire on a crowd, killing five townspeople and infuriating locals.
• What became known as the Boston Massacre intensified anti-British sentiment and proved a pivotal event leading up to the American Revolution.

Boston, cradle of revolution

What do you think.

• Richard Archer, As If an Enemy’s Country: The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), xvi.
• For more, see Neil L. York, The Boston Massacre: A History with Documents (New York: Routledge, 2010).
• See Neil Longley York, "Rival Truths, Political Accommodation, and the Boston 'Massacre,'" Massachusetts Historical Review , Volume 11 (2009), 57–95.
• Hiller B. Zobel, The Boston Massacre (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1970), 301-302.

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

Everything you've ever wanted to know about the American Revolution

Boston Massacre of 1770 | Summary, Causes, Effects, Facts

About the author.

Edward A. St. Germain created AmericanRevolution.org in 1996. He was an avid historian with a keen interest in the Revolutionary War and American culture and society in the 18th century. On this website, he created and collated a huge collection of articles, images, and other media pertaining to the American Revolution. Edward was also a Vietnam veteran, and his investigative skills led to a career as a private detective in later life.

The Boston Massacre was an incident that occurred on March 5, 1770, where a group of British soldiers fired into a crowd of civilians on King Street in Boston.

In this article, we’ve explained what happened during the Boston Massacre, and what caused it. We’ve also explained what happened in the aftermath, and provided some interesting facts about the event.

On the evening of March 5, 1770, two British soldiers guarding the Boston Custom House got into an argument with a local apprentice, leading one of the soldiers to hit the boy over the head with his musket.

A colonist who witnessed the assault began arguing with the soldiers, and gradually a mob formed, surrounding the British troops on the steps of the Custom House.

The crowd grew to over 300 people over the course of a few hours, and the British called for backup. They eventually ended up with nine men, including Captain Thomas Preston, who arrived from the nearby barracks.

The crowd threw snowballs, stones, and other projectiles, and hurled insults at the soldiers. Eventually, the soldiers panicked, and let out a volley of shots.

Three Americans were killed instantly, and another two would later die in hospital. Eight further civilians were injured.

In the late 1760s, tension was building between American colonists and the British government.

The British implemented the Stamp Act in 1765 , creating a new direct tax on colonial consumers. This led to widespread protests – colonists were outraged, as they did not feel the British had the right to tax them without their consent. Ultimately, the British were forced to repeal the Stamp Act a year later.

To the colonists’ dismay, the British immediately began implementing new laws to try and increase taxation revenue, in part by cracking down on illegal smuggling.

In 1767 and 1768, the British implemented the Townshend Acts . The Acts gave customers officials more power to search colonial ships and seize goods, and made it so that people accused of smuggling would be tried by a judge, rather than a colonial jury, increasing the likelihood of a conviction.

The acts also reduced the tax on tea purchased from the British East India Company, and placed new taxes on certain goods traded by colonial merchants.

The Townshend Acts caused widespread discontent, especially in Boston. At the time, Boston was a major trading hub, meaning it was home to large numbers of colonial merchants, sailors, and traders, who relied on being able to conduct commerce (including illegal smuggling) to make a living.

Boston residents were also upset by the presence of large numbers of British troops stationed in the city, who had arrived in 1768 to deal with protests, vandalism, and violence caused by the Townshend Acts.

Officially, under the British Quartering Act of 1765 , Massachusetts was supposed to provide housing and other supplies to British troops in their colony, which further upset the colonists.

Essentially, the Boston Massacre occurred because the people of Boston were extremely upset with the British authorities in the late 1760s and early 1770s. They felt that the British were threatening their livelihoods, freedom, and the autonomy of their colony.

Aftermath and effects

Immediately after the Boston Massacre, there was a fight to control the narrative about what happened.

The Patriot side labeled the event “The Boston Massacre” and portrayed it as a senseless killing of unarmed civilians, orchestrated by the British Army.

Paul Revere produced a famous propaganda engraving of the incident, which is shown below.

This engraving is not factually accurate – the British did not open fire in an orderly fashion as the image suggests, and they were not given the order to fire as the scene depicts.

The British called the event “The Incident on King Street” and tried to quell tensions in Boston. British troops were removed from the city, and those involved in the massacre were arrested and charged with murder.

For the Patriot side, propaganda about the Boston Massacre was very effective. The event caused an increase in colonial unity against British rule, and was used to demonstrate that the British government were tyrants, as hardline Patriots argued.

The trials for the soldiers were held in a colonial court in Massachusetts. The colonial government wanted to avoid a further escalation in tension with the British, so care was taken to ensure a fair trial.

John Adams , a leading Patriot, was brought in to defend the soldiers to avoid any accusations of bias from Bostonians.

The trial was decided by jury, to improve public trust. However, none of the jurors were from Boston, as the court thought that Bostonians would be too biased against the British.

Adams argued that the soldiers feared for their lives, and were forced to open fire after the crowd attacked them. He claimed that the crowd got close enough to grab the soldier’s bayonets, although some eyewitness accounts contradicted this.

In the end, six of the eight soldiers were acquitted, including Captain Preston. Two soldiers who were found to have fired into the crowd were found guilty of manslaughter, and were sentenced to branding of the thumb, escaping the death penalty.

• The first person killed during the massacre is thought to be Crispus Attucks, a man of African and Native American descent. He is remembered as a significant figure in African-American history, as the first person killed during the American Revolution, five years before the Revolutionary War officially started.
• The term “Boston Massacre” was coined by Samuel Adams to emphasize the brutality of the event and rally public support against the British government. The word was used to evoke strong emotions, even though the killing was relatively small in scale compared to most definitions of the word “massacre”.
• Following the incident, Bostonians began the tradition of marking the anniversary of the event with speeches and commemorations, which became known as the “Boston Massacre Orations”.
• The famous engraving by Paul Revere, depicting the Boston Massacre, was actually based on a drawing by Henry Pelham, another artist. Revere’s version was altered to emphasize the violence of the British.
• It remains unclear who exactly fired the first shot during the Boston Massacre. Some reports suggest that a soldier was knocked down by a club or a stick, and his musket discharged as he fell, while others believe the firing was more deliberate.

Related posts

Diary of charles herbert, american prisoner of war in britain.

Read the diary of Charles Herbet, a Continental soldier that was captured by the British Army and sent to a prison of war camp in the UK.

1781 Entries | James Thatcher’s Military Journal

Read entries from 1781 in the journal of James Thatcher, Continental Army surgeon during the American Revolution.

1780 Entries | James Thatcher’s Military Journal

Read entries from 1780 in the journal of James Thatcher, Continental Army surgeon during the American Revolution.

The Boston Massacre

On March 5, 1770, British soldiers shot into a crowd of rowdy colonists in front of the Custom House on King Street, killing five and wounding six.

The Boston Massacre marked the moment when political tensions between British soldiers and American colonists turned deadly. Patriots argued the event was the massacre of civilians perpetrated by the British Army, while loyalists argued that it was an unfortunate accident, the result of self-defense of the British soldiers from a threatening and dangerous mob. Regardless of what actually happened, the event fanned the flames of political discord and ignited a series of events that would eventually lead to American independence. John Adams believed that “on that night, the foundation of American independence was laid.”  

Following the end of the French and Indian War , Great Britain began to levy taxes on her colonies to defray the cost of the expensive war. However, colonies who had been in charge of taxing themselves began to openly resist Great Britain. Decades of self-rule and benign neglect had many colonists feeling their liberty was being stripped away by their mother country.  Boston was the home to some of the most radical opponents and largest protests. In an attempt to use an excessive amount of force to crack down on these upstart colonials, Great Britain passed the Townshend Acts in 1767 and dispatched the British Army to restore order in Boston.  On October 1, 1768, the British fleet arrived, and hundreds of British soldiers marched into the hostile city.

Rather than restore order, this maneuver proved to only worsen relations between the British and Americans. The presence of British regular troops in the streets of Boston enraged colonists, who now felt they were being occupied by a foreign army. British soldiers faced numerous insults and taunting as they patrolled the streets.  The verbal abuse soon became physical as fights between civilians and British soldiers became common in the streets of Boston.  Angry mobs would frequently protest British soldiers or American loyalists who supported the British policies. In February of 1770, Christopher Seider, an 11-year-old boy, was killed while protesting with a group in front of the home of a loyalist.  Thousands of Bostonians turned out for the boy’s funeral and the tension and distrust between the civilians and the British grew larger.

It was just eleven days after Seider’s death, on March 5, 1770, when Private Hugh White of the 29 th  Regiment of Foot took up a sentry post outside of the Customs House on King Street. The Customs House had taken on symbolic meaning as the center of British taxation. As a young wigmaker’s apprentice, Edward Garrick, passed the sentry, he yelled at a British officer that he had not paid his bill for a wig. The sentry, White, reprimanded the young man. The two engaged in a heated conversation when Private White swung his musket at Garrick, hitting him on the side of the head.

Word traveled through the streets about the altercation and a large mob began to descend on the lone British sentry at the Custom House. As the mob of people began to grow larger and larger, the sentry called for reinforcements. Seven British soldiers of the 29 th  Regiment of Foot, under the command of Captain Thomas Preston, marched to the sentry’s defense with fixed bayonets.  As the nine British soldiers stood guard near the steps to the Custom House, passions enflamed and dozens of more people joined the crowd surrounding the soldiers. Bells began ringing in the city and more people came out of their homes and into the streets. The crowd was estimated to have grown to as many as 300 or 400 people. They were yelling at the soldiers, shouting profanities and insults at the soldiers. Others threw rocks, paddles, and snowballs at the besieged men.  One of those protestors near the soldiers was a former slave named Crispus Attucks . The crowd continued to hurl verbal abuse and challenged the soldiers repeatedly to fire their weapons. Preston’s men loaded their muskets in front of the crowd.

The crowd became angrier and angrier. At one point a club or stick was thrown at the soldiers and struck one of the British soldiers.  The soldier fell to the ground. He stood back up and yelled, “Damn you, fire!” and fired his musket into the crowd. The musket ball struck Attucks who fell dead to the ground. A few seconds later, the other British soldiers fired into the crowd.  Eleven people were hit, five men were killed and six were wounded. After the smoke cleared, Preston ordered his men to cease fire and called out dozens of soldiers to defend the Custom House.

Most of the crowd of civilians left the area immediately around the soldiers as others ran to help the wounded. American blood had been spilled at the hands of British soldiers for the first time.  Royal governor Thomas Hutchison arrived on the scene and calmed the anxious and angry colonists and promised justice for what had just occurred. The next day Preston and the eight soldiers involved were arrested and sent to trial for murder.

Following the event, patriot Paul Revere made an engraving based on an illustration by Henry Pelham of the event and labeled it with the provocative title: “The Bloody Massacre.” The image depicted a line of British soldiers firing in unison on an unarmed crowd in front of the State House. This incendiary image outraged many colonists as the event soon became known as a massacre. Broadsides depicting black coffins for the men killed in the incident appeared in newspapers. The funerals for these victims became large public events where patriots displayed their anger at the occupying soldiers.

As public sentiment against the British soldiers grew, Massachusetts placed the soldiers on trial for murder. It became very difficult to find someone who would be willing to publicly defend the British soldiers. Then patriot John Adams agreed to defend them. Despite the public backlash to his defense of the British soldiers, Adams believed it was important to show the British that a fair trial could be held in the colony of Massachusetts, despite the inflamed passions. After a heated trial, Adams was ultimately victorious in showing the British soldiers were not at fault and had acted in self-defense. Six soldiers were found not guilty and two were found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter.

The Boston Massacre was one of the most important events leading up to the Revolutionary War.  The tragic event was commemorated annually in Boston with orations that further fueled negative views of the British soldiers living amongst them. With the large amounts of distrust between the colonists and British soldiers, Massachusetts citizens would need to look to their own defense against possible aggression by the British Army. The two would finally clash five years after the event at Lexington and Concord outside Boston. Almost 50 years after the fact, John Adams described the importance of these events: “How slightly however, historians, may have passed over this event, the blood of the Martyrs, right, or wrong, proved to be the seeds of the Congregation. Not the Battle of Lexington or Bunkers Hill ; not the surrender of Burgoyne , or Cornwallis , were more important events in American history than the battle of King Street, on the 5th of March 1770.”

Want to learn more? Watch our  Boston Massacre: Animated Graphic Novel 

Further Reading

• John Adams Under Fire: The Founding Father's Fight for Justice in the Boston Massacre Murder Trial   By: Dan Abrams and David Fisher 
• The Boston Massacre   By: Thomas Fleming 
• American Rebels: How the Hancock, Adams, and Quincy Families Fanned the Flames of Revolution   By: Nina Sankovitch
• The Boston Massacre: A Family History   By: Serena Zabin

Tea: Brewing a Revolution

The Tipping Point: The Boston Tea Party

The British East India Company

You may also like.

Boston Massacre

Server costs fundraiser 2024.

The Boston Massacre , or the Incident on King Street, occurred in Boston, Massachusetts, on 5 March 1770, when nine British soldiers fired into a crowd of American colonists, ultimately killing five and wounding another six. The massacre was heavily propagandized by colonists such as Paul Revere and helped increase tensions in the early phase of the American Revolution (c. 1765-1789).

In the mid-1760s, the Parliament of Great Britain attempted to directly tax the Thirteen Colonies of British North America to raise revenue in the aftermath of the expensive Seven Years' War (1756-1763). Although Parliament believed it was well within its authority, the American colonists disagreed; as subjects of the British Crown, the colonists believed they enjoyed the same rights as all Britons, including the right of self-taxation. Since the colonists were unrepresented in Parliament, they contended that Parliament had no power to directly tax them; prominent colonists like Samuel Adams (1722-1803) of Boston argued that the Americans would be resigning themselves to the status of 'tributary slaves' if they consented to pay the Parliamentary tax (Schiff, 73).

In April 1765, news reached the colonies that Parliament had issued the Stamp Act , a direct tax on all paper documents. The outraged colonists protested the Stamp Act in a variety of ways; the Virginia House of Burgesses passed a series of resolves denouncing the act as a violation of Americans' rights, while colonial merchants began boycotting British imports. However, the most dramatic opposition to the Stamp Act took place in Boston, the capital of the Province of Massachusetts Bay. On 14 August 1765, a mob of Bostonians hanged an effigy of Andrew Oliver, the stamp distributor for Massachusetts, from an elm tree before viciously ransacking his house that evening. Fearing for his life, Oliver resigned the next day, but the mob was unsatisfied; on 26 August, it attacked the home of Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson of Massachusetts, stealing all movable goods from the house. These riots were celebrated throughout the colonies; the Sons of Liberty, a loosely organized group of colonial political agitators, dated its founding from the riots, while the elm tree on which Oliver's effigy was hanged became known as Boston's 'Liberty Tree'.

Parliament repealed the Stamp Act in March 1766, but the colonists barely had time to celebrate before a new set of taxes and regulations, the Townshend Acts , were passed by Parliament between 1767 and 1768. These acts imposed new duties on goods such as glass, paint, and tea, and required a Board of Commissioners to set up headquarters in Boston to oversee the collection of the taxes. When the five commissioners arrived in Boston in November 1767, they were greeted by a hostile crowd carrying effigies and wearing labels that read, "Liberty & Property & no Commissioners" (Middlekauff, 163). Nor did the commissioners receive a much warmer welcome from Boston's leading citizens; John Hancock (1737-1793), one of the city's wealthiest merchants, refused to allow his Cadet Company, a military organization he operated, to participate in a parade held to welcome the commissioners. Eager to put men like Hancock in his place, the commissioners seized Hancock's sloop, the Liberty , on 10 June 1768, on the pretext that the Liberty had transported contraband goods and that its captain had threatened a tax collector.

When British sailors arrived to take possession of the Liberty , they were greeted by a mob, who were already angry that the British had been impressing Boston sailors into the Royal Navy. A brawl broke out along the docks that soon blossomed into a city-wide riot, as thousands of colonists roamed the streets beating up tax collectors and attacking the commissioners' homes. The royal officials had to flee to Castle Island, a fortified island in Boston Harbor, to escape the violence. To restore order, General Thomas Gage, commander-in-chief of all British forces in North America, decided to move troops into Boston. Roughly 2,000 British soldiers, mostly from the 29th and 14th regiments, were loaded into transports and carried from Halifax to Boston, arriving in the town on 1 October 1768. A manifestation of Britain's imperial power, the red-coated soldiers disembarked and marched to Boston Common, their fixed bayonets gleaming in the sunlight.

A Garrison Town

The British force was commanded by Lieutenant Colonel William Dalrymple of the 14th Regiment, who sent a request to Boston officials to supply quarters and provisions for his men. The colonial authorities refused, telling Dalrymple that there were ample barracks on Castle Island, and until those barracks reached capacity, they would not pay for any British soldiers to be quartered in Boston itself. After several days of fruitless negotiations, during which time the British regiments remained stuck on the ships, Colonel Dalrymple finally had enough. He ordered all his men into Boston; if the stubborn local officials refused to provide quarters, Dalrymple would simply camp his men on Boston Common.

The majority of the 29th Regiment did indeed set up camp on the common, pitching their tents amongst the town's livestock, while the 14th Regiment got slightly luckier and moved into Faneuil Hall, drafty and cramped though it was. With the rapid approach of winter, these accommodations could only last for so long, and within weeks, the troops had moved into warehouses, inns, and other buildings rented out by private citizens. If the Bostonian officials had hoped to make a point by refusing to pay for the army's lodgings, Colonel Dalrymple had made a point of his own: until Boston cleaned up its act, the soldiers were here to stay. For the next year and a half, this was an unavoidable fact of life, as Bostonians and soldiers lived and worked side by side.

The enmity between the colonists and the soldiers was apparent from the beginning. The daily sight of armed redcoats patrolling their streets and standing guard outside public buildings was almost too much to bear for the Bostonians, who were unused to having their personal liberties challenged in such a way. The colonists particularly hated having their comings and goings challenged by British sentries, posted on major streets. Though it was standard procedure for sentries posted anywhere in Britain to challenge passers-by, the Bostonians resented this and often chose not to respond; this sometimes led to scuffles that would more than likely end with the unruly colonist being hit with a musket butt. Matters were not helped by the fact that off-duty soldiers often drank to excess, leading to several incidents where colonists were taunted or threatened by drunken soldiers.

The longer the British soldiers remained in Boston, the more they integrated themselves within the community, much to the chagrin of some of their new neighbors. Army regulations at the time allowed off-duty soldiers to find work at civilian jobs to supplement their military incomes. These soldiers were often willing to work below the going rate of pay, leading them to take jobs that Bostonian laborers felt belonged to them. Some British soldiers courted and even married Boston women , a union unacceptable to any self-respecting Son of Liberty. Bostonian Judge Richard Dana, for instance, went so far as to prevent his daughter from leaving the house, for fear that she would fraternize with a soldier.

At the same time, many Bostonians took pity on the British soldiers, especially after witnessing the harsh discipline they were subjected to. It was not uncommon for soldiers to receive hundreds of lashes for infractions that the colonists considered insignificant; one Private Daniel Rogers was sentenced to 1,000 lashes from a cat-o'-nine-tails after deserting his post to visit his family in nearby Marshfield. Rogers received 170 lashes before losing consciousness; he was spared from enduring the rest of his punishment after Bostonians petitioned Colonel Dalrymple to have mercy on him.

Private Richard Eames, another deserter, was not so lucky; after being caught on a farm in Framingham, Eames was executed by firing squad on Boston Common. Such actions horrified the colonists and convinced them of the cruelty of the British army. By April 1769, an average of one British soldier was deserting every two and a half days, a rate that alarmed military officials, who suspected that the colonists were aiding runaway soldiers. They were not wrong, as some Bostonians were actively encouraging the soldiers to desert; the rate of desertion added to the propaganda of the Sons of Liberty, who wasted no time using it to show that American life was preferable to life in the British army.

Murder of Christopher Seider

As tensions rose between Bostonians and British soldiers, colonial merchants' boycotts of the Townshend Acts remained in force. However, some merchants, like Theophilus Lillie, refused to comply with the boycotts; Lillie argued that the Bostonians had no more right to force him to comply with a boycott than Parliament had to tax the colonies. Lillie's outspokenness marked him as a target for Boston's liberty faction; on 22 February 1770, a crowd primarily comprised of young boys carried a sign to his shop that read "Importer", singling Lillie out as a violator of the boycott.

One of Lillie's neighbors, Ebenezer Richardson, attempted to shoo the crowd away and tear down the sign. Richardson was well-known as an informant for royal officials, and the crowd quickly redirected its anger toward him. The crowd followed him home and surrounded his house, with some participants shouting: "Come out you damn son of a bitch, I'll have your heart and liver out" (Middlekauff, 208). Richardson felt his life was in danger, and after some of the crowd began breaking his windows, he fired a gun into the mass of people. One boy was wounded and another, eleven-year-old Christopher Seider, was killed. Richardson was arrested and eventually convicted of murder, although he was ultimately freed when the king pardoned him.

The murder of young Seider only served to pour gas on the fire. Richardson was not a British soldier, but his actions increased the town's disdain of royal officials and of the soldiers, who were after all there to see those officials' policies carried out. The Sons of Liberty organized Seider's funeral, which was attended by thousands of Bostonians.

Brawl at Gray's Ropewalk

In the weeks following Seider's funeral, fights between soldiers and Bostonians became more frequent. The most consequential of these occurred on 2 March, when an off-duty soldier walked into John Gray's Ropewalk searching for a job. When the soldier asked a ropemaker if he had any work, the ropemaker responded that he did, inviting the soldier to "clean my shithouse" (Middlekauff, 209). The soldier took this as an insult and struck the ropemaker; their fight quickly turned into a street brawl as more soldiers and Bostonians joined the fray. The following day, several more fights broke out, often involving clubs and cudgels. With tensions in the city at an all-time high, it was only a matter of time before blood would be spilled.

Sign up for our free weekly email newsletter!

The Incident

At 8 p.m. on 5 March 1770, Private Hugh White of the 29th Regiment was standing guard outside the customshouse on King Street. As he stood at his post, Private White overheard Edward Gerrish, an apprentice, insult an army officer by saying that there were "no gentlemen among the officers of the 29th" (Middlekauff, 210). White took it upon himself to discipline the lad by giving him a blow on the ear; Gerrish also appears to have been struck by an off-duty soldier standing nearby. Word that Gerrish had been accosted by a British soldier quickly spread and within 20 minutes, a crowd of angry Bostonians had surrounded Private White. The crowd hurled verbal abuse at the soldier; when White threatened to run them through with his bayonet if they did not disperse, the crowd started throwing snowballs and chunks of ice. White backed up to the door of the customshouse, where he attempted to hold back the mob singlehandedly.

Captain Thomas Preston watched with mounting unease. Preston was in command that evening and was aware that he would have to act if the crowd did not clear off on its own. It soon became apparent that Preston would have no such luck; the city's church bells began to ring, which usually meant that there was a fire. At first, scores of well-meaning civilians showed up carrying buckets of water to help put out the nonexistent flame, then others arrived, carrying clubs and even swords, their anger fueled by rumors that British soldiers meant to cut down the Liberty Tree. Preston decided to act; he ordered six privates and a corporal to follow him into the crowd, intending to rescue White. Preston and the soldiers easily pushed their way through the crowd but found themselves trapped when the Bostonians filled in behind them.

With the soldiers now trapped by the mob, Preston ordered his men to form a semicircle, their backs to the customshouse, and load their muskets. For 15 tense minutes, the standoff continued; some of the redcoats were recognized by the colonists as having participated in the brawl outside Gray's Ropewalk, leading tensions to increase. By this point, the crowd numbered 300-400, and angry Bostonians continued to throw snowballs and pieces of ice at the soldiers. Some colonists began striking the soldiers' muskets with sticks, daring them to fire. Captain Preston positioned himself in front of his men, at which point a colonist warned him to "take care of your men for if they fire, your life must be answerable." To this, Preston simply replied, "I am sensible of it" (Middlekauff, 211). An innkeeper named Richard Palmes then pulled Preston aside to inquire if the soldiers' muskets were loaded; Preston responded that they were but assured Palmes that they would not fire.

As Preston and Palmes spoke, a piece of ice flung from the crowd hit Private Hugh Montgomery, causing him to slip and fall down. Montgomery staggered to his feet before discharging his musket into the crowd, despite having received no order to do so. After Montgomery's shot rang out, there was a short pause before the other soldiers opened fire. Eleven men were hit. Three died instantly including ropemaker Samuel Gray, mariner James Caldwell, and Crispus Attucks, a mixed-race sailor of African and Native American descent. Samuel Maverick, a 17-year-old apprentice, became the fourth victim when he died of his wounds the next morning, while Patrick Carr, an Irish immigrant, sustained a wound in the abdomen and lingered for two weeks before finally succumbing.

Although the crowd was scattered by the shooting, it had reformed within hours and began prowling the streets calling for vengeance against Captain Preston and his men. Lieutenant Governor Hutchinson knew he had to de-escalate the situation and had Preston and the other eight soldiers arrested the following day; the British soldiers were indicted for murder. Despite the rage that many Bostonians felt toward the British army, Boston officials were aware that they needed to ensure a fair trial, lest they give the army reason to retaliate. To achieve this purpose, the trials of Preston and his men were delayed until autumn, to give tempers time to cool off and to have a better chance of finding an impartial jury. The soldiers would be defended by John Adams (1735-1826), a Bostonian lawyer destined to become the second President of the United States. Although Adams was an ardent Patriot, he firmly believed that everyone was entitled to a fair trial, leading him to accept the case.

Captain Preston was tried first, in the last week of October 1770. After calling many witnesses who gave often contradictory accounts, Adams was able to give the jury reasonable doubt that Preston had given the order to fire, and the captain was acquitted. The other eight soldiers were tried together a month later; Adams told the jury that they had been accosted by a violent mob and had only fired out of self-defense. This mob, according to Adams, was comprised mainly of "molattoes, Irish teagues, and Jack Tars [i.e., sailors]" (Zabin, 216). By painting the mob as consisting mostly of those considered to be outsiders, he successfully deflected the blame from both the 'upstanding' Bostonians and the soldiers. Again, Adams achieved his goal; six soldiers were fully acquitted. Two were convicted of manslaughter and had their thumbs branded, a light punishment compared with the penalty of death that was originally on the table.

Although the soldiers were lightly punished, the people of Boston would not soon forget that five of their number had been killed in cold blood by soldiers of His Majesty's army. Tensions between colonists and redcoats only increased after the incident; a famous engraving by Paul Revere (1735-1818), based on an original by Henry Pelham, depicts the line of British soldiers calmly firing a volley into the crowd, Captain Preston standing behind them with his sword raised. While this is clearly a propagandized version of events, it became accepted by many colonists who began referring to the incident as the 'Boston Massacre'.

The massacre holds an important place in the story of the American Revolution, marking the first instance in which blood was spilled over the cause of American liberty. More colonists began to view Britain, and even the king, with distrust; after the massacre, the lines between American 'Loyalists', or supporters of Britain, and 'Patriots', or supporters of the Liberty cause, became more defined, helping to hasten the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War (1775-1783) and, ultimately, the drafting of the American Declaration of Independence .

Subscribe to topic Related Content Books Cite This Work License

Bibliography

• Boston Massacre | History, Facts, Site, Deaths, & Trial | Britannica , accessed 9 Nov 2023.
• Brands, H. W. The First American: The Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin. Anchor, 2002.
• McCullough, David. 1776. Simon & Schuster, 2006.
• Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause. Oxford University Press, 2007.
• Schiff, Stacy. The Revolutionary: Samuel Adams. Little, Brown and Company, 2022.
• Zabin, Serena R. . The Boston Massacre: A Family History. Mariner Books, 2020.

About the Author

Translations

We want people all over the world to learn about history. Help us and translate this definition into another language!

Questions & Answers

What was the boston massacre, was the boston massacre self-defense, what happened in the boston massacre trial, why was the boston massacre significant, related content.

Paul Revere

Townshend Acts

Samuel Adams

Boston Tea Party

Joseph Warren

Intolerable Acts

Free for the world, supported by you.

World History Encyclopedia is a non-profit organization. For only $5 per month you can become a member and support our mission to engage people with cultural heritage and to improve history education worldwide.

Recommended Books

Cite This Work

Mark, H. W. (2023, November 13). Boston Massacre . World History Encyclopedia . Retrieved from https://www.worldhistory.org/Boston_Massacre/

Chicago Style

Mark, Harrison W.. " Boston Massacre ." World History Encyclopedia . Last modified November 13, 2023. https://www.worldhistory.org/Boston_Massacre/.

Mark, Harrison W.. " Boston Massacre ." World History Encyclopedia . World History Encyclopedia, 13 Nov 2023. Web. 10 Aug 2024.

License & Copyright

Submitted by Harrison W. Mark , published on 13 November 2023. The copyright holder has published this content under the following license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike . This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon this content non-commercially, as long as they credit the author and license their new creations under the identical terms. When republishing on the web a hyperlink back to the original content source URL must be included. Please note that content linked from this page may have different licensing terms.

American Revolution

The boston massacre.

The Boston Massacre refers to the shooting deaths of five civilians by British soldiers in 1770. More than 1,500 soldiers had been garrisoned in Boston since late 1768, proving a source of frustration and annoyance for many locals. Political radicals circulated propaganda alleging poor behaviour and mistreatment by the soldiers, further adding to tensions. In March 1770, a confrontation between groups of soldiers and locals on King Street ended with the British opening fire. The resulting deaths caused mixed reactions, from concern to outrage, while radicals depicted them as evidence of British military tyranny.

The Boston Massacre was precipitated by an increased presence of British soldiers in the city. That decision was itself the result of unrest and occasional violence in the Massachusetts capital.

Some of the more prominent examples of his violence include the attacks on Thomas Hutchinson , John Malcom and others during the Stamp Act crisis, the ongoing harassment of customs officials; intimidation of Loyalist merchants who sought to honour the Townshend duties; and the mob violence that followed the seizing of John Hancock ‘s sloop Liberty in June 1768.

The Massachusetts governor, Francis Bernard , found himself in an unenviable position, under pressure from all sides. General Thomas Gage , Britain’s military commander-in-chief in North America, then based in Halifax, began mobilising troops to send to Boston at the governor’s request.

Bernard, knowing the likely outcome, was reluctant to pull the trigger. In the end, he did not have to. In August 1768, Lord Hillsborough, Secretary of State for the Colonies and president of the Board of Trade, instructed Gage to send two regiments of troops to rebellious Boston.

British troops in Boston

In response to Hillsborough’s order, Gage deployed the 14th and 29th Regiments of Foot to the Massachusetts capital. On October 1st, hundreds of Redcoats landed at Long Wharf and paraded up King Street to the tune of fifes and drumbeats. Some pitched tents on Boston Common while others, to the outrage of locals, took up residence in Faneuil Hall, where the local assembly regularly sat.

Problems arose from the outset. With most local officials refusing to honour the Quartering Act , there were long and often heated disputes over where to accommodate the soldiers. Bernard almost triggered a riot when he authorised the use of Boston’s Manufactory House, a building sheltering local homeless. The plan was abandoned after a mob arrived, leading to a brief stand-off.

In their first weeks in Boston, British troops were generally well behaved. Aware of the potential for trouble, commanders pressed officers to maintain the strictest discipline. They did by threatening, and occasionally using, severe forms of corporal punishment. That itself may have contributed to several dozen soldiers absconding in the first month.

The ‘Journal of Occurrences’

This was despite the best efforts of radical propagandists. Led by Samuel Adams , in the autumn of 1768 a small group of Sons of Liberty began a campaign to discredit the military presence in Boston. They did this by circulating a series of reports on the alleged misconduct of British troops in the city.

The first of these articles was published in a New York newspaper in October 1768. By December, they were appearing in Boston itself and as far afield as London. Titled the ‘Journal of Occurrences’, they contained grisly stories of peaceful Bostonians being insulted and assaulted, hoodwinked and robbed by drunken and villainous Redcoats. The mistreatment of women, extending to sexual abuse, was a common theme evident in this December 29th piece:

“A married lady of this town [was] taken hold of by a soldier, who other ways behaved to her with great rudeness. A woman near Long Lane was stopped by several soldiers, one of whom cried out seize her and carry her off… Another woman was pursued by a soldier into a house near the North End, who proceeded to enter the same and behave with great insolence. Several inhabitants while quietly passing the streets in the evening have been knocked down by soldiers… The insolence of power will forever be despised by a people who retain a just sense of liberty.”

British officials dismissed these reports as fake news. Francis Bernard said of the Journal of Occurrences that “there could not have been got together a greater collection of impudent, virulent and seditious lies, perversions of truth and misrepresentations”.

Bernard embarrassed

By the spring of 1769, four regiments of around 4,000 soldiers were stationed in a Boston, a city of barely 17,000. Locals continued to strongly object to their presence and were routinely annoyed by their activities (one regular complaint was that soldiers broke the Sabbath by drilling and breaking the peace on Sundays). Troops were regularly taunted or insulted by rowdy locals.

By and large, though, Boston remained comparatively calm. British authorities, thinking the situation had settled, began to consider recalling at least some of the garrison. General Gage received instructions from Lord Hillsborough that he could withdraw troops from Boston at his own discretion.

In April 1769, letters from Governor Francis Bernard to London fell into the hands of the Sons of Liberty. These letters, later published in the Boston press, revealed Bernard had supported the landing of troops in the city. The ensuing scandal led to Bernard’s recall to England in August.

Bernard was replaced by the even more unpopular Thomas Hutchinson. Meanwhile, Gage, thinking the situation much calmer, ordered the withdrawal of two regiments from Boston to Halifax, leaving less than 2,000 soldiers in the city.

Christopher Seider

This reduction in troop numbers did not allay tensions. If anything, they began to increase. Soldiers on checkpoint and sentry duty routinely found themselves being harassed by local workmen. Numerous soldiers were hauled before the city’s civilian courts for petty offences and claims, from trespass to allegations of robbery.

There were also several reported incidents of intimidation and brawling, both with soldiers and local Loyalists. On February 22th 1770, a mob assembled outside the house of Ebenezer Richardson, an outspoken Loyalist who had provided customs authorities with information about smugglers. When the group hurled stones at Richardson’s home, he grabbed a musket and fired pellets from a window. Some found the chest of 11-year-old Christopher Seider, inflicting mortal injuries.

Adams and the Sons of Liberty seized on Seider’s death, which began a propaganda circus. His funeral, four days after his death, began with inflammatory speeches at Boston’s Liberty Tree before proceeding to the burial ground. The procession was attended by 2,000 people or more than 10 per cent of the city’s population.

Richardson was placed on trial and found guilty of murder. He was later pardoned by King George III , after lobbying from Hutchinson, and released from jail. Understandably, he fled Boston for Philadelphia before relocating to England.

The incident in King Street

Seider’s death and the propaganda that exploited it saw tensions peak. In the two weeks that followed, local gangs regularly gathered in the afternoon or at dusk to bait, intimidate and hurl objects at local Loyalists or lone British sentries.

It was this behaviour that sparked the event we know as the Boston Massacre. On March 5th, a soldier stationed outside the Customs House on King Street engaged in verbal sparring with a 13-year-old boy. When the teenager became belligerent, the soldier struck him with the butt of his musket.

Word of this altercation quickly spread and by dark, a larger crowd of between 40 and 50 had gathered near the sentry post. Heated words were exchanged and soon gave way to the hurling of snowballs and stones. The sentry was joined by other soldiers and the situation deteriorated.

Amid the chaos an unknown figure fired a shot, perhaps leading other soldiers to believe an order to fire had been given. Without orders and in no formation, the soldiers fired upon the Bostonians. The shots hit 11 of the mob, killing three of and fatally wounding two more.

The deaths in King Street were tragic but not unexpected, given the heightened tensions and the fracas in King Street. Nevertheless, acting governor Thomas Hutchinson promised a thorough investigation into the deaths. In the interim, Captain Thomas Preston, the only British officer present at the time, and eight soldiers were arrested and detained.

Preston and four soldiers were later charged with murder. Their case was taken up John Adams , much to the alarm of Boston’s political radicals. In his defence of the soldiers, Adams assigned blame to the violent rabble of ‘saucy boys’ rather than the soldiers. All were eventually acquitted.

For radicals looking to exploit the tragedy, truth was not going to get in the way. The events of March 5th were dubbed the ‘Boston Massacre’ or ‘the Bloody Massacre of King Street’. Rumours circulated that it was an intentional act, quietly sanctioned by royal officials, and colonial cities who dared resist a British military presence could expect similar treatment.

Perhaps the most famous product of the Boston Massacre was a colourful but wildly exaggerated engraving crafted by Paul Revere , depicting the shootings as a coordinated attack. Revere circulated copies around Massachusetts, making a small profit from their sale. The ideas it contained were apparent to all: a deliberate assault on the civilians of Boston.

“Anti-British opinion was inflamed with broadsides and pamphlets, such as ‘A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston’, first published in 1770 by a partisan committee chaired by James Bidden… The document included eye-witness interviews of military men, citizens and others, who testified about their experiences on that day … Coverage of the “massacre’ had little impact in the American colonies outside Massachusetts, but for many years after it was commemorated on its anniversary.” Martin Manning, historian

A report on the death of Christopher Seider (February 1770) A newspaper account of the Boston Massacre (March 1770) Eyewitness accounts of the ‘Boston Massacre’ (1770)

1. The Boston Massacre is a name given to the shooting deaths of five civilians following a stand-off with British soldiers in March 1770.

2. More than 1,500 British soldiers had arrived in Boston from October 1768, a response to violent and intimidatory actions that followed the passing of the Townshend duties.

3. The presence of a large military contingent was an annoyance for Bostonians. Radicals like Samuel Adams circulated propaganda about their poor behaviour towards civilians.

4. The shooting of a young boy by a Loyalist in February 1770 heightened tensions. Two weeks later, a confrontation between soldiers and local workers led to the deaths of five men.

5. The soldiers, represented in court by John Adams, were acquitted of murder. Despite this, radicals like Paul Revere produced propaganda and painted the shootings as a deliberate act.

Citation information Title: ‘The Boston Massacre’ Authors: Jennifer Llewellyn , Steve Thompson Publisher: Alpha History URL: https://alphahistory.com/americanrevolution/boston-massacre/ Date published: July 16, 2019 Date updated: November 22, 2023 Date accessed: August 10, 2024 Copyright: The content on this page is © Alpha History. It may not be republished without our express permission. For more information on usage, please refer to our Terms of Use .

American Revolution: The Boston Massacre

• M.A., History, University of Delaware
• M.S., Information and Library Science, Drexel University
• B.A., History and Political Science, Pennsylvania State University

In the years following the French and Indian War , the Parliament increasingly sought ways to alleviate the financial burden caused by the conflict. Assessing methods for raising funds, it was decided to levy new taxes on the American colonies with the goal of offsetting some of the cost for their defense. The first of these, the Sugar Act of 1764 , was quickly met by outrage from colonial leaders who claimed "taxation without representation," as they had no members of Parliament to represent their interests. The following year, Parliament passed the Stamp Act which called for tax stamps to be placed on all paper goods sold in the colonies. The first attempt to apply a direct tax to the North American colonies, the Stamp Act was met with widespread protests.

Across the colonies, new protest groups, known as the " Sons of Liberty " formed to fight the new tax. Uniting in the fall of 1765, colonial leaders appealed to Parliament stating that as they had no representation in Parliament, the tax was unconstitutional and against their rights as Englishmen. These efforts led to the Stamp Act's repeal in 1766, though Parliament quickly issued the Declaratory Act which stated that they retained the power to tax the colonies. Still seeking additional revenue, Parliament passed the Townshend Acts in June 1767. These placed indirect taxes on various commodities such as lead, paper, paint, glass, and tea. Again citing taxation without representation, the Massachusetts legislature sent a circular letter to their counterparts in the other colonies asking them to join in resisting the new taxes.

London Responds

In London, the Colonial Secretary, Lord Hillsborough, responded by directing colonial governor to dissolve their legislatures if they responded to the circular letter. Sent in April 1768, this directive also ordered the Massachusetts legislature to rescind the letter. In Boston, customs officials began to feel increasingly threatened which led their chief, Charles Paxton, to request a military presence in the city. Arriving in May, HMS Romney (50 guns) took up a station in the harbor and immediately angered Boston's citizens when it began impressing sailors and intercepting smugglers. Romney was joined that fall by four infantry regiments which were dispatched to the city by General Thomas Gage . While two were withdrawn the following year, the 14th and 29th Regiments of Foot remained in 1770. As military forces began to occupy Boston, colonial leaders organized boycotts of the taxed goods in an effort to resist the Townshend Acts.

The Mob Forms

Tensions in Boston remained high in 1770 and worsened on February 22 when young Christopher Seider was killed by Ebenezer Richardson. A customs official, Richardson had randomly fired into a mob that had gathered outside his house hoping to make it disperse. Following a large funeral, arranged by Sons of Liberty leader Samuel Adams , Seider was interred at the Granary Burying Ground. His death, along with a burst of anti-British propaganda, badly inflamed the situation in the city and led many to seek confrontations with British soldiers. On the night of March 5, Edward Garrick, a young wigmaker's apprentice, accosted Captain Lieutenant John Goldfinch near the Custom House and claimed that the officer had not paid his debts. Having settled his account, Goldfinch ignored the taunt.

This exchange was witnessed by Private Hugh White who was standing guard at the Custom House. Leaving his post, White exchanged insults with Garrick before striking him in the head with his musket . As Garrick fell, his friend, Bartholomew Broaders, took up the argument. With tempers rising, the two men created a scene and a crowd began to gather. In an effort to quiet the situation, local book merchant Henry Knox informed White that if he fired his weapon he would be killed. Withdrawing to safety of the Custom House stairs, White awaited aid. Nearby, Captain Thomas Preston received word of White's predicament from a runner.

Blood on the Streets

Gathering a small force, Preston departed for the Custom House. Pushing through the growing crowd, Preston reached White and directed his eight men to form a semi-circle near the steps. Approaching the British captain, Knox implored him to control his men and reiterated his earlier warning that if his men fired he would be killed. Understanding the delicate nature of the situation, Preston responded that he was aware of that fact. As Preston yelled at the crowd to disperse, he and his men were pelted with rocks, ice, and snow. Seeking to provoke a confrontation, many in the crowd repeatedly yelled "Fire!" Standing before his men, Preston was approached by Richard Palmes, a local innkeeper, who inquired if the soldiers' weapons were loaded. Preston confirmed that they were but also indicated that he was unlikely to order them to fire as he was standing in front of them.

Shortly thereafter, Private Hugh Montgomery was hit with an object that caused him to fall and drop his musket. Angered, he recovered his weapon and yelled "Damn you, fire!" before shooting into the mob. After a brief pause, his compatriots began firing into the crowd though Preston had not given orders to do so. In the course of the firing, eleven were hit with three being killed instantly. These victims were James Caldwell, Samuel Gray, and Crispus Attucks . Two of the wounded, Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr, died later. In the wake of the firing, the crowd withdrew to the neighboring streets while elements of the 29th Foot moved to Preston's aid. Arriving on the scene, Acting Governor Thomas Hutchinson worked to restore order.

Immediately beginning an investigation, Hutchison bowed to public pressure and directed that British troops be withdrawn to Castle Island. While the victims were laid to rest with great public fanfare, Preston and his men were arrested on March 27. Along with four locals, they were charged with murder. As tensions in the city remained dangerously high, Hutchinson worked to delay their trial until later in the year. Through the summer, a propaganda war was waged between the Patriots and Loyalists as each side tried to influence opinion abroad. Eager to build support for their cause, the colonial legislature endeavored to ensure that the accused received a fair trial. After several notable Loyalist attorneys refused to defend Preston and his men, the task was accepted by well-known Patriot lawyer John Adams .

To assist in the defense , Adams selected Sons of Liberty leader Josiah Quincy II, with the organization's consent, and Loyalist Robert Auchmuty. They were opposed by Massachusetts Solicitor General Samuel Quincy and Robert Treat Paine. Tried separately from his men, Preston faced the court in October. After his defense team convinced the jury that he had not ordered his men to fire, he was acquitted. The following month, his men went to court. During the trial, Adams argued that if the soldiers were threatened by the mob, they had a legal right to defend themselves. He also pointed out that if they were provoked, but not threatened, the most they could be guilty of was manslaughter. Accepting his logic, the jury convicted Montgomery and Private Matthew Kilroy of manslaughter and acquitted the rest. Invoking the benefit of clergy, the two men were publicly branded on the thumb rather than imprisoned.

Following the trials, tension in Boston remained high. Ironically, on March 5, the same day as the massacre, Lord North introduced a bill in Parliament that called for a partial repeal of the Townshend Acts. With the situation in the colonies reaching a critical point, Parliament eliminated most aspects of the Townshend Acts in April 1770, but left a tax on tea. Despite this, conflict continued to brew. It would come to head in 1774 following the Tea Act and the Boston Tea Party . In the months after the latter, Parliament passed a series of punitive laws, dubbed the Intolerable Acts , which set the colonies and Britain firmly on the path to war. The American Revolution would begin on April 19, 1775, when to two sides first clashed at Lexington and Concord .

• Massachusetts Historical Society: The Boston Massacre
• Boston Massacre Trials
• iBoston: Boston Massacre
• The Root Causes of the American Revolution
• American Revolution: Boston Tea Party
• American Revolution: The Intolerable Acts
• Questions Left by The Boston Massacre
• All About the Sons of Liberty
• American Revolution: Siege of Boston
• The Battles of Lexington and Concord
• American Revolution: The Townshend Acts
• American Revolution Battles
• John Hancock: Founding Father With a Famous Signature
• The Currency Act of 1764
• Quartering Act, British Laws Opposed by American Colonists
• Biography of Paul Revere: Patriot Famous for His Midnight Ride
• American Revolution: The Stamp Act of 1765
• American Revolution: Early Campaigns
• An Introduction to the American Revolutionary War

The Boston Massacre: A Crucial Turning Point in American History

In the annals of American history, few events have been as pivotal or as fraught with tension and tragedy as the Boston Massacre. On the crisp winter night of March 5, 1770, this violent incident marked a crucial turning point in the relationship between Britain and its American colonies, igniting a spark that would eventually explode into the American Revolution. This article aims to guide you through the tumultuous events leading up to the Massacre, the incident itself, its immediate aftermath, and the enduring legacy it left behind.

The Tensions in Pre-Massacre Boston

The townshend acts and the seeds of discontent.

The Townshend Acts were a series of laws passed by the British Parliament in 1767, named after Chancellor of the Exchequer Charles Townshend, who proposed the program. These acts imposed duties on several goods imported to the American colonies, including paper, glass, lead, paints, and, most notably, tea. This was part of Britain's broader strategy to exert greater control over the colonies and generate revenue to offset Britain's debt from the French and Indian War.

From the colonists' perspective, the Townshend Acts were not just a financial burden but also a glaring representation of the unjust principle of taxation without representation. The colonists had no say in these laws, and no voice in Parliament, yet they were expected to comply with them. This lack of representation was a significant source of discontent and a catalyst for the growing sentiment of rebellion.

In Boston, the opposition to these acts was particularly fierce. The city became a hotbed of resistance, with merchants organizing non-importation agreements as a form of economic protest. These measures were not wholly effective, but they did contribute to a climate of hostility and defiance toward British authority.

The Townshend Acts thus laid the groundwork for the escalating tensions between the colonists and the British government. The resentment these acts bred among the colonists contributed directly to incidents like the Boston Massacre. In retrospect, the Townshend Acts and the reaction they provoked can be seen as a significant step on the road to the American Revolution.

The arrival of the British Troops

In the autumn of 1768, an ominous shadow fell over Boston. The decision of the British government to dispatch soldiers to this bustling colonial hub was a grim warning of the escalating tensions that were to mark the latter part of the decade. These were the "redcoats," so-called for their distinctive uniforms, symbols of British authority, and the enforcement of the contentious Townshend Acts.

Imagine, if you will, the sight of a thousand soldiers disembarking from their ships, marching in formation through the narrow streets of Boston, a city of barely 16,000 souls. Their presence was a stark physical reminder of the far-off Parliament's will and their number, a grim indication of the lengths the Crown was prepared to go to assert its authority.

To the Bostonians, the arrival of the British troops was an invasive show of force. The city, a hotbed of resistance against the Townshend Acts, was under something akin to martial law. The soldiers were often quartered among the citizens, fueling a smoldering resentment against the British government.

This was a clash of two worlds, cultures and governance systems. On the one hand, the proud and defiant colonists had tasted the sweet fruit of autonomy and self-governance. Conversely, the disciplined and regimented soldiers represent a system built on hierarchy, tradition, and control.

The redcoats' presence stirred significant resentment among the colonists. Incidents of harassment and violence against the soldiers became increasingly common, setting the stage for a confrontation that would be a pivotal moment in the American struggle for independence. Thus, the arrival of British troops in Boston wasn't merely a significant event but a catalyst for further conflict, a spark that would ignite the fuse of revolution.

The Boston Massacre: A Night of Chaos

The incident.

On the night of March 5, 1770, snow blanketed the cobblestone streets of Boston, reflecting the pale moonlight. A winter's chill hung in the air, a silent spectator to the unfolding drama. 

The evening began with a single altercation, a moment of friction between a small group of colonists and a lone British sentry near the Custom House on King Street. Heated words were exchanged, escalating into taunts and accusations. The tension in the air was palpable, a tangible manifestation of the months of unrest and hatred that had plagued the city.

As the crowd grew, the lone sentry found himself the focus of their ire. Objects - snowballs, stones, and chunks of ice - began to be thrown, each missile a physical embodiment of the crowd's resentment towards the British presence in their city.

The situation teetered on a knife's edge until the arrival of Captain Thomas Preston and a detachment of British soldiers. They intended to restore order, but their presence only stoked the flames of discord. Despite the Captain's efforts to maintain control, the crowd, now swollen to several hundred, refused to be cowed. Their taunts and provocations grew bolder, more defiant.

And then, the unthinkable happened. A shot rang out, piercing the din of the crowd. To this day, it remains unclear who fired that fateful first shot. But that solitary report was all it took to shatter the tension-filled silence. The British soldiers, perhaps panicked, perhaps fearful for their own lives, discharged their muskets into the crowd.

When the gunfire echoes subsided, five colonists lay dead or dying, and six more were injured. The night of chaos had culminated in shocking violence, forever etching March 5, 1770, into the collective memory of a nation yet to be born. The "Incident on King Street," as it was initially referred to, would soon come to be known as the Boston Massacre. 

Aftermath and Trial

Public outrage and propaganda.

In the aftermath of the tragic event, the streets of the American colonies were awash with a tidal wave of public outrage. As if overnight, the incident had galvanized an already discontent populace, providing a potent rallying cry for those opposed to British rule. Aided by the powerful tools of propaganda, the narrative of the event took on a life of its own, stoking the fires of rebellion.

One of the most significant pieces of propaganda to emerge from this tumultuous time was an engraving crafted by Paul Revere. His piece, "The Bloody Massacre in King-Street," was less a factual depiction of the event and more a potent visual narrative designed to incite strong emotional responses. The British soldiers were cast as remorseless villains, coldly gunning down unarmed, innocent colonists. Though the reality of that fateful night was considerably more complex and chaotic, the stark black-and-white imagery of Revere's engraving etched a powerful, enduring image into the colonial consciousness.

Simultaneously, Samuel Adams, a formidable figure in the burgeoning resistance movement, saw the potential in this tragic event. He seized upon the incident, writing passionately about the harsh brutality of British soldiers towards their colonial subjects. While his depictions may have skewed away from the strictest adherence to the facts, they were undeniably effective in stirring public sentiment against the British. Adams' accounts were widely disseminated, his fiery words echoing through town squares and homes across the colonies.

Even the term "massacre" was a masterstroke of propaganda. The word evoked images of a premeditated, large-scale slaughter, a far cry from the messy, panicked skirmish that had occurred. However, it served its purpose brilliantly, inflaming passions and fortifying the colonists' resolve against their perceived oppressors.

In the hands of skilled propagandists like Revere and Adams, the Boston Massacre transformed from a tragic event into a rallying cry for freedom. The public outrage after the incident was like a spark to dry tinder, igniting a fire of rebellion that would eventually blaze into the American Revolution. As we delve into history, we must remember the power of such narratives and their role in shaping our perception of the past. It's a stark reminder of the adage that the victors often write history.

As the dust of the Boston Massacre settled, the British soldiers involved in the incident found themselves in the eye of a storm of public fury. However, in an unexpected twist, their defense was taken up by John Adams, a known patriot and future second President of the United States. This decision was not without its controversy, but Adams, ever the principled statesman, stood steadfast in his belief in the sanctity of a fair trial, even for those reviled by the public.

Adams' defense of the British soldiers was a delicate balancing act, a testament to his skills as a lawyer and a diplomat. He had to navigate the complex, tumultuous waters of public sentiment while adhering to the principles of law and justice. His argument hinged on the premise of self-defense, contending that the British soldiers, faced with an unruly mob hurling projectiles, had acted in response to a perceived mortal threat.

In a remarkable display of legal acumen, Adams secured acquittals for six of the eight soldiers. The remaining two were found guilty of manslaughter, receiving reduced sentences. This outcome was extraordinary despite overwhelming public sentiment against the soldiers.

However, Adams' role in the trial was not without personal cost. His defense of the British soldiers was deeply unpopular among his fellow colonists, and he faced significant backlash. However, he stood by his convictions, famously stating, "It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished."

In the grand tapestry of history, this trial was not just about determining the guilt or innocence of these soldiers; it was a pivotal moment that highlighted the core principles that would come to define the nascent United States.

The Enduring Legacy of the Boston Massacre

Prelude to revolution.

The fallout from the Massacre resonated far beyond the streets of Boston, spreading like wildfire through the thirteen colonies. This incident did not occur in isolation, culminating in growing colonial frustration with British policies, particularly the much-despised Townshend Acts. The Massacre stoked these simmering resentments, turning them into a roaring flame of opposition.

The American colonists, now united in their outrage, began to view themselves not just as British subjects but as a distinct entity with their rights and liberties. The Boston Massacre catalyzed this transformation, propelling the colonists down a path of resistance and revolution.

Key colonial figures, such as Samuel Adams and Paul Revere, leveraged the public outrage following the Massacre to rally support for the colonial cause. They harnessed the power of the printed word and the spoken voice to spread their message far and wide, turning the Boston Massacre into a powerful symbol of British tyranny.

In the aftermath of the Boston Massacre, the line in the sand was drawn. The British government's attempts to control the colonies had resulted in bloodshed, and the colonists were no longer willing to stand by idly. The incident served as a wake-up call, rallying the colonists and setting the stage for the momentous events that were to follow.

The Boston Massacre was thus not just a tragic incident but a prelude to the larger symphony of the American Revolution. It was a moment that marked a clear shift in colonial sentiment, a turning point where the path to revolution became not just possible but inevitable. And as such, it stands as a critical chapter in the narrative of America's journey toward independence.

The Boston Massacre was not merely an isolated violent incident on a frigid March night in 1770. It was a pivotal event, a catalyst that accelerated the American colonies' path toward revolution. This tragic event galvanized a burgeoning sense of colonial identity and shared destiny, from the echoes of the gunshots on King Street to the public outrage and propaganda that ensued.

The trial that followed the massacre also plays a vital role in our understanding of this period. The defense of the British soldiers by John Adams, a future U.S. President, demonstrates the commitment to justice and the rule of law that would become a cornerstone of the new nation. 

Reflecting on the Boston Massacre, we must remember that it was more than a flashpoint in the long journey to American independence. It was a moment that illuminated the escalating conflict between the British government and the American colonies, a tragic episode that thrust the issues of representation, sovereignty, and liberty into sharp relief.

• South Portland School Department
• Digital Learning Commons
• American Revolution
• Boston Massacre
• No Taxation Without Representation
• Boston Tea Party
• Intolerable/Coercive Acts
• Continental Congress
• British and Loyalists
• Native Americans
• African Americans
• Lexington & Concord, April 1775
• Bunker Hill, June 1775
• Quebec, December 1775
• Long Island, August 1776
• Trenton, December 1776
• Saratoga, October 1777
• Yorktown, October 1781
• Weapons & Uniforms
• George Washington
• Thomas Jefferson
• Benjamin Franklin
• Alexander Hamilton
• James Madison
• King George III
• Benedict Arnold
• Articles of Confederation
• Federalist Papers
• Declaration of Independence
• Constitution
• Bill of Rights

Old State House, site of the Boston Massacre

• Beyond the Mythology of The Boston Massacre Explores the mythology of the Boston Massacre, Paul Revere's engraving of the event, and the rise of lawyer, and future-President, John Adams.
• What Really Happened In The Boston Massacre? Interview with author and professor of history Eric Hinderacker about the differing published accounts of the Boston Massacre.
• John Adams and the Boston Massacre Trial of 1770 Links to court proceedings (primary sources) from the Boston Massacre Trial.
• Boston Massacre Trial Brief overview of the Boston Massacre Trial. Citation... Hide... “Boston Massacre Trial.” National Parks Service , U.S. Department of the Interior, www.nps.gov/bost/learn/historyculture/massacre-trial.htm.

Primary Sources

• History of the Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770 History of the Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770. Consisting of the narrative of the town, the trial of the soldiers: and a historical introduction, containing unpublished documents of John Adams, and explanatory notes. Citation... Hide... Kidder, Frederic, et al. History of the Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770: consisting of the narrative of the town, the trial of the soldiers, and a historical introduction, containing unpublished documents of John Adams, and explanatory notes. J. Munsell, 1870, www.loc.gov/law/help/rare-books/pdf/john_adams_1870_history.pdf.
• Perspectives on the Boston Massacre Fantastic resource from the Massachusetts Historical Society. Provides history of the Boston Massacre, primary documents, reactions at the time, information on the trial, and much more. Citation... Hide... “Perspectives on the Boston Massacre.” Massachusetts Historical Society, www.masshist.org/features/massacre/visual.
• A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston Pamphlet published recounting the British side of the Boston Massacre. Citation... Hide... A fair account of the late unhappy disturbance at Boston: in New England ; extracted from the depositions that have been made concerning it ... With an appendix .. London, B. White, 1770, books.google.com/books?id=bKtbAAAAQAAJ.
• A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston Pamphlet published recounting the Bostonian's side of the Boston Massacre. Citation... Hide... Doggett, John, et al. A Short narrative of the horrid massacre in Boston: perpetrated in the evening of the fifth day of March, 1770, by soldiers of the 29th Regiment, which with the 14th Regiment were then quartered there: with some observations on the state of things prior to that catastrophe. Boston, Messrs. Edes and Gill, 1770, books.google.com/books?id=catbAAAAQAAJ.

• << Previous: No Taxation Without Representation
• Next: Boston Tea Party >>
• Last Updated: Dec 12, 2023 12:34 PM
• URL: https://libguides.spsd.org/americanrevolution

• Introduction
• Related Information
• Jefferson's Account
• Declaration House
• Declaration Timeline
• Rev. War Timeline
• More Resources
• Lesson Plan

The Declaration of Independence

When in the course of human events . . .

• USHistory Home

The Boston Massacre

The Boston Massacre was a street fight that occurred on March 5, 1770, between a "patriot" mob, throwing snowballs, stones, and sticks, and a squad of British soldiers. Several colonists were killed and this led to a campaign by speech-writers to rouse the ire of the citizenry.

"The Bloody Massacre" engraving by Paul Revere. Note that this is not an accurate depiction of the event.

The presence of British troops in the city of Boston was increasingly unwelcome. The riot began when about 50 citizens attacked a British sentinel. A British officer, Captain Thomas Preston, called in additional soldiers, and these too were attacked, so the soldiers fired into the mob, killing 3 on the spot (a black sailor named Crispus Attucks, ropemaker Samuel Gray, and a mariner named James Caldwell), and wounding 8 others, two of whom died later (Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr).

A town meeting was called demanding the removal of the British and the trial of Captain Preston and his men for murder. At the trial, John Adams and Josiah Quincy II defended the British, leading to their acquittal and release. Samuel Quincy and Robert Treat Paine were the attorneys for the prosecution. Later, two of the British soldiers were found guilty of manslaughter.

Note that the occupation of Boston by British troops in 1768 was not met by open resistance.

Start page | The Document | Signers | Related Information | Jefferson's Account | Declaration House | Declaration Timeline | Rev. War Timeline | More Resources |

Buy a Declaration

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University website

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

The Boston Massacre

• Michael Kraemer

On the night of March 5, 1770, a man and a British sentry exchanged heated words in Boston, Massachusetts. Within minutes, three people lay dead in the snow and several others were injured, two fatally. This event, popularly referred to as the “Boston Massacre,” was a turning-point in relations between American colonists and British authorities, and provided one of the sparks that would ignite the American Revolution.

Written by Michael Kraemer. Narration by Dr. Nicholas B. Breyfogle. Video production by Cody Patton, Laura Seeger, and Dr. Nicholas B. Breyfogle.

Meet the 2024 History Teachers of the Year!

• AP US History Study Guide
• History U: Courses for High School Students
• History School: Summer Enrichment
• Lesson Plans
• Classroom Resources
• Spotlights on Primary Sources
• Professional Development (Academic Year)
• Professional Development (Summer)
• Book Breaks
• Inside the Vault
• Self-Paced Courses
• Browse All Resources
• Search by Issue
• Search by Essay
• Become a Member (Free)
• Monthly Offer (Free for Members)
• Program Information
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Applying and Enrolling
• Eligibility (In-Person)
• EduHam Online
• Hamilton Cast Read Alongs
• Official Website
• Press Coverage
• Veterans Legacy Program
• The Declaration at 250
• Black Lives in the Founding Era
• Celebrating American Historical Holidays
• Browse All Programs
• Donate Items to the Collection
• Search Our Catalog
• Research Guides
• Rights and Reproductions
• See Our Documents on Display
• Bring an Exhibition to Your Organization
• Interactive Exhibitions Online
• About the Transcription Program
• Civil War Letters
• Founding Era Newspapers
• College Fellowships in American History
• Scholarly Fellowship Program
• Richard Gilder History Prize
• David McCullough Essay Prize
• Affiliate School Scholarships
• Nominate a Teacher
• State Winners
• National Winners
• Gilder Lehrman Lincoln Prize
• Gilder Lehrman Military History Prize
• George Washington Prize
• Frederick Douglass Book Prize
• Our Mission and History
• Annual Report
• Contact Information
• Student Advisory Council
• Teacher Advisory Council
• Board of Trustees
• Remembering Richard Gilder
• President's Council
• Scholarly Advisory Board
• Internships
• Our Partners
• Press Releases

History Resources

The Boston Massacre

By elizabeth berlin taylor, introduction.

In this lesson, students will be asked to learn the disputed and agreed-upon facts of the Boston Massacre in small groups and then discuss them and propose a website definition of the Massacre as a class. This lesson should not only provide students with an opportunity to look at disparate representations of so-called historical facts surrounding a very famous event that preceded the American Revolution, but will also teach them to deliberate with their classmates in a cordial fashion.

On the night of March 5, 1770, American colonists attacked British soldiers in Boston, which resulted in the soldiers firing on the crowd and killing five of the colonists. This event became known as the Boston Massacre, a rallying point for colonists against the stationing and quartering of British troops throughout the colonies, and against the Townshend Acts, which the British soldiers were deployed to enforce. Many different accounts of this encounter are extant as John Adams successfully defended the British soldiers in court and thus had to depose numerous witnesses.

Primary Sources

"The Bloody Massacre," by Paul Revere (PDF)

Deposition of Theodore Bliss , Boston Massacre Historical Society

Captain Thomas Preston’s Account of the Boston Massacre , Boston Massacre Historical Society

" The Soldiers Trial: October 24 to 30, 1770: Selected Testimony ," The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, Famous Trials Project

Summation of John Adams , The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, Famous Trials Project

Anonymous Account of the Massacre , The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, Famous Trials Project

Secondary Source

Library of Congress "America’s Library" site for kids, which gives a brief overview of the Boston Massacre.

Essential Question

What really transpired on the night of March 5, 1770?

• Students will be able to read and understand primary documents that are key to understanding the Boston Massacre and the ensuing trials of the British troops and their captain.
• Students will be able to identify similarities and differences between primary source documents.
• Students will be able to discuss the Boston Massacre as a class to decide what they think actually occurred.
• Students will be able to propose and vote on a definition for the Boston Massacre for a history website for elementary school students.

Motivation: Give students five minutes to read over the information at the "America’s Library" site. After that time, ask students to close their computers, or, if using a print copy, collect that copy. Ask students to remember as many details about the Massacre as they can from the site. The teacher should record the facts on the board as they are announced by the students so that they are visible to the entire class.

After the motivation has provided a basic understanding of the events of the Boston Massacre, inform the students that for the rest of the class they are going to be history detectives and decide what they think really happened in the Boston Massacre.

Project the famous Paul Revere engraving "The Bloody Massacre," and ask students a variety of questions about what they see:

• What do you see in this engraving?
• How are the colonists portrayed?
• How are the British soldiers portrayed?
• According to this engraving, who is at fault in this Massacre? How do you know?

As students identify that the engraving seems to put the British soldiers at fault for the Boston Massacre, the teacher will inform them that they are going to read a variety of other documents and decide if Paul Revere was conveying the truth about the circumstances of the event.

Put students into eight groups of four. The members of each group will analyze the same document, as the primary sources are fairly challenging reading. Give each group a packet that includes copies of one of the following: the Deposition of Theodore Bliss, Captain Thomas Preston’s Account of the Boston Massacre, the Summation of John Adams, and the Anonymous Account of the Massacre. Students will read and analyze their group’s document, noting at the bottom of the handout five of the described events.

Students will jigsaw so that they will be in a new group in which each member reads a separate article. The students will fill in the attached worksheet that asks them to find events that were discussed in more than one source. Also, students will write a summary of what they think took place during the Boston Massacre. Each group will choose a spokesperson who will read a brief explanation to the class of what they think happened.

The teacher will request the input of up to three of the groups and then summarize the work that was done in that period.

(This can also be an optional extension of the prior lesson.)

Students will briefly review the facts that they think are true about the Boston Massacre, referring to their previously read articles and the worksheet they completed with their second group.

The teacher will then pose the question, "If we were going to make a website for elementary school students about the Boston Massacre, what should the site say?" The class will decide this question by having a whole-class discussion.

Each student will get two popsicle sticks. When the student wishes to speak, he or she will raise her stick and then turn it in as he or she speaks. Thus, each student will have at most two opportunities to speak during the discussion. The teacher will need to guide the discussion by asking the following questions (and by recording the answers where they can be seen by the entire class):

• Can we agree as a class upon what actually happened during the Boston Massacre?
• What seems certainly to be true? Why?
• What might be true?
• What do you think is certainly untrue? Why?
• How should we write our definition for a website?
• What should we include and what should we omit?

The teacher should stress that the goal of the class is to come up with a well-written and historically accurate definition of the Boston Massacre for a website.

Debrief the discussion. What are some of the benefits and drawbacks of that method of decision making in a piece of writing? Was it hard to come up with a definition? Are you pleased with the definition you wrote?

Students can create a podcast about the Boston Massacre that uses the class definition. Another extension would be to have students create a website on the American Revolution and use the class definition as a page in the site.

Stay up to date, and subscribe to our quarterly newsletter.

Learn how the Institute impacts history education through our work guiding teachers, energizing students, and supporting research.

American Revolution

Boston massacre.

• The British call the Boston Massacre the "Incident on King Street".
• After the incident, both sides tried to use propaganda in the newspapers to make the other side look bad. One famous engraving by Paul Revere shows Captain Preston ordering his men to fire (which he never did) and labels the Custom House as "Butcher's Hall".
• There is some evidence that the colonists planned the attack on the soldiers.
• One of the men killed was Crispus Attucks, a runaway slave who had become a sailor. The other victims included Samuel Gray, James Caldwell, Samuel Maverick, and Patrick Carr.
• There was little evidence against the four civilians arrested and they were all found not-guilty in their trial.
• Take a ten question quiz about this page.
• Listen to a recorded reading of this page:

• Perspectives on the Boston Massacre
• Reactions and Responses
• The Massacre Illustrated
• Anniversaries
• Browse Items by Format

Although Capt. Thomas Preston, the eight British soldiers under his command, and four civilians were all indicted within weeks of the "Horrid Massacre", none were formally arraigned until 7 September 1770. Court schedules, as well as political maneuverings by Acting Gov. Thomas Hutchinson, further delayed the trials until late October of that year, an unpopular decision among many who already distrusted the governor for his support of British taxation.

The judges for the trials were Benjamin Lynde, John Cushing, Peter Oliver, and Henry Trowbridge. The prosecution lawyers were Robert Treat Paine and Samuel Quincy. The defense team included John Adams, Josiah Quincy, Jr. (Samuel Quincy's brother), Sampson Salter Blowers, and Robert Auchmuty. Both trials lasted longer than one day, which was rare at this time for Massachusetts courts. Shortly after the trials, on 15 May 1771, the issue of expenses and wages paid to jurors was argued by Adams, both Quincy brothers and James Otis, Jr.

The Trial of Capt. Preston

The first trial to be held as a consequence of the Boston Massacre was Rex v. Preston . The trial of Capt. Preston, who had been held in jail for seven months, began on 24 October 1770 and the verdict of not guilty was issued a week later on 30 October 1770.

The Trial of Eight Soldiers from the 29th Regt.

The second trial, Rex v. Wemms et al., began on 27 November 1770 and was brought against William Wemms and seven other soldiers from the 29th Regiment: James Hartigan, William McCauley, Hugh White, Mathew Kilroy, William Warren, John Carroll, and Hugh Montgomery. The verdict was announced nine months to the day after the Massacre, on 5 December, by a jury that did not include a Boston resident. Six of the soldiers were acquitted while two (Kilroy and Montgomery) were found guilty, not of murder, but of the lesser charge of manslaughter.

The two convicted soldiers were able to avoid the death penalty by invoking "benefit of the clergy", a holdover from early English law which held that secular courts had no jurisdiction over clergymen, and which had become a loop-hole for first-time offenders. After "praying the clergy" the soldiers were branded-on the hand where the thumb meets the palm with the letter "M" for manslaughter-insuring that they could only receive the commutation once, and that the mark would be clearly visible during a handshake or while raising their palm on any future oath.

Trial Notes of Robert Treat Paine

As part of the prosecution team for both trials, Robert Treat Paine took lengthy notes which were published in the Legal Papers of John Adams, Volume 3. The description of Paine's Massacre Notes from that volume lists (and provides links to) several documents that are fully transcribed. The volume also contains many footnotes with references to specific notes kept by Paine.  Browse or search the online version of the volume to locate and read Paine's trial notes.

Although many of the courtroom proceedings of the trial of the eight soldiers were transcribed and published, Paine's closing argument as one of the prosecution lawyers for the Wemms trial was not recorded because the stenographer was fatigued. The following documents are largely letters from different parties requesting that Paine write out his own closing arguments from his notes and from memory. Also included is a link to transcriptions of rough drafts notes from Paine's closing argument. No final version is known to have been written down.

Trial Notes of John Adams

Thirty-five year old John Adams, a prominent lawyer in Boston who would go on to become the second president of the United States, was asked to take on the unpopular assignment of defending Capt. Preston and the eight British soldiers.

Additional Sources

Boston merchant Harbottle Dorr, Jr., collected, annotated, and indexed many newspapers during the years leading to the American Revolution. Dorr's newspaper collection includes many articles written about the Boston Massacre and the trials. See, for example, this article by Samuel Adams , or this anonymous article printed after the Wemms verdict . Dorr's collection also includes a pamphlet with the complete proceedings of Rex v. Wemms which was printed immediately after the conclusion of the trial and includes many annotations by Dorr.

• Teacher Opportunities
• AP U.S. Government Key Terms
• Bureaucracy & Regulation
• Campaigns & Elections
• Civil Rights & Civil Liberties
• Comparative Government
• Constitutional Foundation
• Criminal Law & Justice
• Economics & Financial Literacy
• English & Literature
• Environmental Policy & Land Use
• Executive Branch
• Federalism and State Issues
• Foreign Policy
• Gun Rights & Firearm Legislation
• Immigration
• Interest Groups & Lobbying
• Judicial Branch
• Legislative Branch
• Political Parties
• Science & Technology
• Social Services
• State History
• Supreme Court Cases
• U.S. History
• World History

Log-in to bookmark & organize content - it's free!

• Bell Ringers
• Lesson Plans
• Featured Resources

Bell Ringer: Samuel Adams and the Boston Massacre

Samuel adams and the boston massacre.

Author Stacy Schiff talked about the life and legacy of American Revolution leader Samuel Adams, including his efforts surrounding the Boston Massacre. The James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation hosted this event.

Description

Bell ringer assignment.

• Who "packaged" the narratives of both the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party? Explain.
• Based on the clip, do we know where Samuel Adams was during the night of the Boston Massacre? Where was he in the weeks and months after the event?
• According to Stacy Schiff, who was the intended audience of Paul Revere's engraving? Why?
• What had Adams been writing "for a year and a half" before the Boston Massacre?
• Describe the second, "canny role" that Adams played in the aftermath of the event.
• What was the outcome of the subsequent "trials?" Why? What did Samuel Adams do in response?

Related Articles

• Samuel Adams: Boston's Radical Revolutionary (U.S. National Park Service)
• Remembering the Boston Massacre (HISTORY)
• Samuel Adams (Britannica)
• Paul Revere’s engraving of the Boston Massacre, 1770 (Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History)

Additional Resources

• Bell Ringer: Samuel Adams and the Boston Tea Party
• Bell Ringer: "The Revolutionary" Samuel Adams
• Lesson Plan: Choice Board: Revolutionary War
• Lesson Plan: Inquiry: Was the American Revolution justified?
• Lesson Plan: Boston Massacre
• Lesson Plan: Events Leading to the American Revolution

Participants

• American Revolution (1765-83)
• Benjamin Franklin
• Boston Massacre (1770)
• Boston Tea Party (1773)
• George Washington
• Misdemeanor
• Paul Revere
• Propagandize
• Samuel Adams
• Tendentious
• Thomas Hutchinson