Was the Boston Massacre really a massacre?
The Boston Massacre Essay: Was it really a massacre? I believe that the Boston Massacre was not a massacre. I think this because there was a lot of propaganda, and the low death toll. The definition of a massacre is an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people. The Boston Massacre consisted of 8 deaths. When everyone was yelling things, it confused the soldiers of what they should do.
The number of deaths didn’t even make it to ten deaths. The number of deaths established that it couldn’t have been an actual massacre. Propaganda is when the actual events were altered and taken out of context to make the reader believe a specific message. In the anonymous account written by the colonies it states, “…that there was not the least provocation given to Capt. Preston of his party…” Considering that this document was written to the colonies, it was created to send rebellious thoughts through the colonists. The picture Paul Revere drew was mostly propaganda. I do not believe that this document is completely accurate. The Boston Massacre was not as vicious as they said it was. As stated in the British document, Capt. Preston stated, “I immediately sent a non-commissioned officer and 12 men to protect both the sentry and the king's money, and very soon followed myself to prevent, if possible, all disorder, fearing lest the officer and soldiers, by the insults and provocations of the rioters, should be thrown off their guard and commit some rash act.” When Capt. Preston stated this, it shows that they didn’t want to hurt or do anything to the colonists. They were just going down there to protect the sentry and the king’s money. If this was really a massacre, the soldier’s motive would have been to kill as many people that they could. The soldiers never meant to kill or injure any colonists. In closure, the Boston Massacre was never a massacre. There was no harsh or enormous amount of deaths during the shooting. Capt. Preston’s encounter of the Boston
The number of deaths didn’t even make it to ten deaths. The number of deaths established that it couldn’t have been an actual massacre. Propaganda is when the actual events were altered and taken out of context to make the reader believe a specific message. In the anonymous account written by the colonies it states, “…that there was not the least provocation given to Capt. Preston of his party…” Considering that this document was written to the colonies, it was created to send rebellious thoughts through the colonists. The picture Paul Revere drew was mostly propaganda. I do not believe that this document is completely accurate. The Boston Massacre was not as vicious as they said it was. As stated in the British document, Capt. Preston stated, “I immediately sent a non-commissioned officer and 12 men to protect both the sentry and the king's money, and very soon followed myself to prevent, if possible, all disorder, fearing lest the officer and soldiers, by the insults and provocations of the rioters, should be thrown off their guard and commit some rash act.” When Capt. Preston stated this, it shows that they didn’t want to hurt or do anything to the colonists. They were just going down there to protect the sentry and the king’s money. If this was really a massacre, the soldier’s motive would have been to kill as many people that they could. The soldiers never meant to kill or injure any colonists. In closure, the Boston Massacre was never a massacre. There was no harsh or enormous amount of deaths during the shooting. Capt. Preston’s encounter of the Boston