Who is to blame for the events in Boston

that are commonly known as the Boston Massacre?

The Boston Massacre was an incident that occurred in Boston in 1770. The

event itself was named a massacre although only four or five men died (sources

vary), and its details remain ambiguous to this day. There is much dispute over

which the guilty party is; however, I'm thoroughly convinced that the American

colonists are the ones to blame in the situation.

The American colonists, as we've learned in class, were in reality a bunch of

troublemakers who unified and fervently did absolutely everything in their power

to throw off England's ruling power and to stir up drama. The Boston "Massacre" is

a perfect example of this. Massacre is defined on dictionary.com as the

"unnecessary, indiscriminate killing of a large number of human beings or animals,

as in barbarous warfare or persecution or for revenge or plunder." 1 In the actual

specific event itself, "The mob...ran away, except three unhappy men who instantly

expired, in which number was Mr. Gray at whose rope-walk the prior quarrels took

place; one more is since dead, three others are dangerously, and four slightly

wounded."2 So an astounding grand total of four men made up the resulting

casualties; and while any loss of life is surely a tragedy, admittedly, four deaths is

hardly enough to label a massacre. And England definitely cannot be to blame for

what is, at the very, very most, a completely innocent mistake on the part of the

1
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/massacre
2
Experience History: Interpreting America's Past, Vol. 1. p. 152
British that was brought about by the American colonists anyway; after all, "they

were under orders not to fire."3

It's no secret that the idea of independence was, at this point, already set in

stone in the minds and hearts of the American colonists, and I'd even go so far as to

say that the colonists intentionally caused the British soldiers to fire at them through

their outrageous taunts (such as "come on you rascals, you bloody backs, you

lobster scoundrels, fire if you dare, G-d damn you, fire and be damned, we know you

dare not..."4). That's precisely what they needed and what they wanted: a

catastrophic event so that they could lay the blame on England. Their taunts were

very legitimate and very inflammatory; they were smart, they knew what they were

doing -- they were not only offending the soldiers as much as possible, but they also

were intentionally confusing and disorienting them ("...they said they heard the

word fire and supposed it came from me. This might be the case as many of the mob

called out fire, fire, but I assured the men that I gave no such order; that my words

were, don't fire, stop your firing. In short, it was scarcely possible for the soldiers to

know who said fire..."5). The colonists persisted in egging them on and deliberately

urging them to shoot their guns.

All in all, the event commonly known as the Boston Massacre was not so

much a merciless slaughter at the fault of the English, as it usually is made out to be,

as it was a massive publicity stunt on the part of the American colonists that,

although tragic, was not entirely deserving of the immense sympathy for the

3
http://www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/revolut/jb_revolut_boston_1.html
4
Experience History: Interpreting America's Past, Vol. 1. p. 152
5
Ibid.
colonists and outrage at England that it triggered. "Starting from the name itself, this

landmark event of the American Revolution proved to be a magnet for popular

myths and misconceptions."6 Killing only four or five people, the name of the

incident itself was grossly exaggerated by Americans to gain sympathy and support

for the Revolution that was soon to come.

6
http://www.bostonmassacre.net/
 SOURCES:

http://www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/revolut/jb_revolut_boston_1.html

http://www.bostonmassacre.net/

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/massacre

Experience History: Interpreting America's Past, Vol. 1. p. 152