Toward Independence - American Revolution PDF

Introduction Toward Independence TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Why was there an American Revolution? An almost full moon cast a pale light over Boston on April 18, 1775, but the night was anything but quiet. Mounted on fast horses, Paul Revere, Dr. Samuel Prescott, and William Daw...

Introduction Toward Independence TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Why was there an American Revolution? An almost full moon cast a pale light over Boston on April 18, 1775, but the night was anything but quiet. Mounted on fast horses, Paul Revere, Dr. Samuel Prescott, and William Dawes woke up the countryside with the news that British troops were on the move from Boston. Information from a Patriot source indicated the British would march to Lexington and Concord to seize weapons the colonists had stored there. Upon hearing the warnings, Patriots prepared to meet the British troops. Patriots (also called American Whigs) were colonists who believed they had the right to govern themselves. Loyalists (also called Tories) were colonists who felt a deep loyalty to Great Britain. They saw themselves as faithful subjects of the king and were horrified by the idea of taking up arms against British troops. Other colonists remained neutral. How did colonists come to be so divided in their feelings about the British? Most Americans were content with British rule in the early 1700s. However, this relationship between Great Britain and the colonies would begin to change. In the 1750s, Great Britain and the colonies fought a war against the French and their Indigenous allies. Great Britain amassed huge debt to maintain its claim to the contested territory. To address this, the British government passed new laws that tightened control of the colonies. Some of these laws placed new taxes on the colonies. Great Britain stunned the colonists when it changed the policies. For the most part, colonial assemblies, in which only White male colonists served, had been able to make their own laws and determine their own taxes. Now colonists protested. In this lesson, you will see how these feelings led many colonists to consider rebelling against their government. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE By the 1770s, the colonists had become deeply divided in their loyalty to Great Britain. Here, some protesters tear down a statue of King George. Social Studies Vocabulary boycott militia  repeal tyranny Vocabulary Cards Glossary Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE 1. Before 1763 By 1750, the 13 colonies were experiencing a population boom. In a century, the colonies had grown from 50,000 to over a million people. What brought about this rapid growth? Access to land? Religious freedom? Economic opportunity? Yes, but there was another reason. For more than a century, the British government had let the colonies solve most of their own problems. During this time, Americans in each colony had learned to govern themselves by electing their own assemblies. However, only White men could vote, and usually, they had to own land. Like the British Parliament, assemblies had the power to pass laws and collect taxes. Each assembly also decided how to spend the colony’s tax money. American colonists had more freedom to run their affairs than ordinary people in any country in Europe. Self government made the colonies attractive to new colonists from Europe. Conflict in the Ohio Valley As the colonial population grew, colonists began to seek land to the west—land that had already been settled by Indigenous peoples. Regardless, they moved across the Appalachian Mountains and into the Ohio Valley, the region between the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. Both Great Britain and France claimed this area, although it was Indigenous land. In 1754, the French staked their claim by building Fort Duquesne (du-KANE), where the city of Pittsburgh stands today, on land taken from the Lenape and Shawnee people, as well as from tribes of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, including the Seneca and Cayuga. News of the fort alarmed the governor of Virginia. He ordered a small force of Virginia militia to drive the French out of the Ohio Valley.The governor chose 22- year-old volunteer George Washington to lead the militia. Today, many remember George Washington as a famous Patriot, a military leader, an enslaver, and the first president of the United States. In 1754, however, he was an ambitious young man who wanted to be an officer in the British army. There was only one problem with his plan—most British officers did not respect colonial militia  soldiers. The expedition into the Ohio Valley gave Washington a chance to prove his military value. Near Fort Duquesne, Washington ambushed a group of French soldiers camped in the woods and ordered his men to open fire, killing 10 people and taking 21 prisoners. “I fortunately escaped without a wound,” he later wrote, “though the right wing where I stood was exposed and received all the enemy's fire.” © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE This drawing by Benjamin Franklin is considered the first political cartoon in American history. In it, Franklin compares the colonies’ lack of unity to a snake cut into pieces. Although the drawing was originally used to promote the Albany Plan, it would soon become a symbol of colonial unity and freedom. The French and Indian War Washington and his men fired the first shots in a conflict known as the French and Indian War. This war was part of the Seven Years’ War, a long global struggle between France and Great Britain over territorial claims and power. Indigenous tribes, particularly the Lenape and Shawnee, fought with France to prevent British settlers from violently taking their land. Because of this, colonists called the conflict the French and Indian War. At the beginning of the war, the colonies met at Albany, where Benjamin Franklin proposed the Albany Plan of Union. Franklin was inspired to create the plan by the  Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy, a political alliance of Iroquoian-speaking groups. Nearly two decades earlier, Franklin had heard a speech by the Onondaga leader Canassatego in which he urged the colonies to unite. However, his plan did not win much support because the colonies did not think it was necessary to work together and many relied on British protection. In fact, Great Britain successfully defended its colonial interests during this conflict. Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE In 1755, Great Britain sent 1,400 British soldiers, led by General Edward Braddock, to Virginia to further Great Britain’s war effort. Hoping to make a good impression on General Braddock, Washington joined the army as a volunteer, aiding the soldiers against the French and their Indigenous allies in the Ohio Valley. However, Braddock’s march into the Ohio Valley was a disaster. French sharpshooters and their allies surprised the troops. Two-thirds of the British soldiers were killed in the attack, including General Braddock. The turning point of the French and Indian War came in 1759, when British troops captured Canada. Later, in 1763, Great Britain and France signed a peace treaty, or agreement, finally ending the Seven Years’ War. In this treaty, France ceded, or gave, its claim of land in Canada to Great Britain. Indigenous groups who had long lived on this land, including France’s allies, did not have a say in the treaty. Colonists were thrilled with this victory because Great Britain now claimed a vastly expanded territory. However, as the conflict with France drew to a close, new issues began to emerge between the colonists and Great Britain. A dramatic new chapter was about to begin for the 13 colonies.  This sculpture, atop Pittsburgh’s Mt. Washington, depicts George Washington and © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE the Seneca leader Guyasuta. In 1753, Guyasuta guided Washington to the French Fort Le Boeuf. Guyasuta, who later fought with the French in the French and Indian War, is called “the Hunter” in Washington’s journal.  Here George Washington plants the British flag at Fort Duquesne. The British captured the fort from the French in 1758 during the French and Indian War. 2. Early British Actions in the Colonies In 1760, near the end of the Seven Years' War, a new British king, George III, began his reign. During his 59-year rule, he resisted revolutionary and Napoleonic France. However, George appointed advisors to manage his more distant foreign affairs in North America. These advisors knew very little about the day-to-day lives of colonists and were soon taking actions that enraged many of them. The Proclamation of 1763 The British government faced many problems after the Seven Years' War. One was how to protect colonists and their land claims as they pushed westward into areas settled by Indigenous groups. In his Proclamation of 1763, George III said to simply draw a line down the crest of the Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Appalachian Mountains and order colonists not to settle past the boundary. To colonists whose fortunes were founded on Indigenous land, the king's order  suggested tyranny, or the unjust use of government power. They argued that White colonists had already claimed most of the land east of the Appalachians and that farmers had to move west to find land. Besides, colonists and land investors had already crossed the mountains into Indigenous territory. The British government ignored colonists' arguments. To control the frontier, it sent an additional 7,500 soldiers to the colonies. The Proclamation of 1763 would later be cited as a grievance in the Declaration of Independence. The Stamp Act The British government had other problems besides stopping colonists from encroaching on Indigenous land. Another dilemma was how to pay off the large debt from the Seven Years' War. The solution seemed obvious to Prime Minister George Grenville, the leader of the British government. People in Great Britain were already paying taxes on everything from windows to salt. In contrast, American colonists were among the most lightly taxed people in the British Empire. It was time, said Grenville, for them to pay their fair share of the cost of Britain protecting colonists and their interests. In 1765, Grenville proposed a new act, or law, called the Stamp Act, which required colonists to buy a stamp for every piece of paper they used. Newspapers, wills, licenses, and even playing cards had to be printed on stamped paper. Again, the colonists sensed tyranny. One newspaper, The Pennsylvania Journal, said that as soon as "this shocking Act was known, it filled all British America from one End to the other, with Astonishment and Grief." It was not just the idea of higher taxes that upset the colonists. They were willing to pay taxes passed by their own assemblies, in which their representatives could vote on them. However, because the colonists had no representatives in Parliament, they saw the Stamp Act as a violation of their rights as British subjects. For this reason, they argued Parliament had no right to tax them. "No taxation without representation!" they declared. Loyalists simply refused to buy stamps, while other colonists protested the Stamp Act by sending messages to Parliament. Patriots took more aggressive action. Protesters calling themselves the Sons of Liberty organized in 1765 and began attacking tax collectors' homes. In Connecticut, they even started to bury one tax collector alive. Only when he heard dirt being shoveled onto his coffin did the © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE terrified tax collector agree to resign from his post. After months of protest, Parliamentrepealed, or canceled, the Stamp Act. Colonists greeted the news with great celebration. Church bells rang, bands  played, and everyone hoped the troubles with Great Britain were over. The Quartering Act As anger over the Stamp Act began to fade, Parliament passed another controversial law in 1765. The Quartering Act ordered colonial assemblies to provide British troops with quarters, or housing. The colonists were also told to furnish the soldiers with "candles, firing, bedding, cooking utensils, salt, vinegar, and … beer or cider." Providing these things for British soldiers cost money. New Jersey protested that the new law was "as much an Act for laying taxes" on the colonists as the Stamp Act. New Yorkers asked why they should pay to keep troops in their colony during peacetime. In 1767, the New York assembly decided not to approve any funds for supplies for the British troops, forcing them to remain on their ships. In retaliation, the British government suspended New York's assembly until it agreed to obey the Quartering Act. Once again, tempers began to rise on both sides of the Atlantic. Shown here is the Proclamation Line of 1763 and locations of Indigenous groups. The line prohibited settlers moving west of the Appalachians into territory Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE inhabited by tribes such as the Lenape and the Haudenosaunee Confederacy.  The Stamp Act required colonists to buy stamps for all paper products. They protested in response to the act, forcing Parliament to repeal it. 3. The Townshend Acts The next British leader to face the challenge of taxing the colonies was Charles Townshend, who oversaw the British Treasury. Townshend believed that the colonists’ protests made it even more important to keep an army in the British colonies. Once asked in Parliament whether he would dare to make the colonists pay for the army, Townshend shouted, “I will, I will!” Townshend kept his promise, and in 1767, he persuaded Parliament to pass the Townshend Acts. The new laws placed a duty, or tax, on certain goods the colonies imported from Great Britain, including such popular items as glass, paint, paper, and tea. A Boycott of British Goods To many colonists, the Townshend duties were © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE unacceptable. Once again, colonists were determined not to pay taxes that their  assemblies had not voted on. A Boston Patriot named Samuel Adams led the opposition to the Townshend Acts. Adams was gifted at stirring up dissent through his speeches and writing. The governor of Massachusetts once complained, “Every dip of his pen stung like a horned snake.” In a letter protesting the Townshend Act, Adams argued that the new duties violated the colonists’ rights as British citizens. The letter was sent to many of the other colonies. Soon, the colonies decided to boycott British goods. This was a form of protest that even Loyalists could support. One by one, all of the colonies agreed to support the boycott. Women played a significant role in the boycott’s success because they did most of the household shopping. The Virginia Gazette wrote that a woman could “do more for the good of her country than five hundred noisy sons of liberty, with all their mobs and riots.” Women found many ways to avoid buying British imports. They further supported the tax protest by producing their own goods, such as homespun cloth and tea from pine needles, and buying American-made products. Repeal of the Townshend Acts As these events unfolded, a new leader named Frederick North, known as Lord North, became head of the British government. He was good with numbers and realized that the Townshend duties were costing Great Britain money. The duties did not make up for the money British merchants were losing because of the boycott. Early in 1770, North persuaded Parliament to repeal all of the Townshend duties, except for one—the tax on tea. Although some members of Parliament argued that the duty on tea would lead to further conflict with the colonies, King George refused to give up on the idea of taxing Americans. “I am clear that there must always be one tax to keep up the right,” the king said. “And, as such, I approve the Tea Duty.” Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  In 1768, the British government sent soldiers to Boston to enforce the Townshend Acts. This colorized engraving, originally made by Paul Revere, shows the troops landing. 4. The Boston Massacre On the same day that Parliament repealed most of the Townshend duties, a fight broke out between soldiers with rifles and colonists with snowballs, rocks and clubs. British troops killed five civilians and injured several others. Although the event was a small riot, Patriots began to call it the “Boston Massacre” to prompt more support for their cause. Trouble had been brewing in Boston for months before the riot. The British viewed Bostonians as the biggest troublemakers in the colonies. In 1768, the British government had sent four regiments of troops because British colonial leaders claimed they were needed to keep order in Boston. Bostonians resented the the presence of armed British soldiers in their city and resisted as best they could. For example, Patriots insulted soldiers and made fun of their red uniforms by calling them “lobsterbacks.” Regardless of how colonists resisted, the British troops were forbidden to fire on citizens. However, knowing this made Bostonians bolder in their attacks. Violence Breaks Out On March 5, 1770, a young Boston man confronted a © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  British soldier about an outstanding debt. Another British soldier hit the young man in the head with his rifle. In response, a group of working-class civilians began to gather, throwing rocks and snowballs at armed British troops who had arrived at the scene of the argument. As the crowd pressed forward, a protester threw something that knocked over a British soldier, who stood up and fired into the crowd. Other soldiers then likewise opened fire into the crowd. They hit several people at the front of the crowd, including Crispus Attucks, a free Black and Wampanoag sailor and rope-maker. Struck by two bullets, Attucks was the first Bostonian the British killed at the protest, but more deaths would soon follow. The enraged crowd went home only after receiving a promise that the troops would be investigated and tried for murder. Massacre or Self-Defense? Samuel Adams saw this event as a perfect opportunity to whip up anti-British feeling among working class and poor colonists. He called the riot in Boston a “horrid massacre” and had Paul Revere, a local silversmith, engrave a picture of it. Revere’s engraving shows soldiers firing at peaceful, unarmed citizens. Prints of Revere’s engraving were distributed throughout the colonies, and Patriots saw the Boston Massacre as proof that the British should remove all of their troops from the colonies. Loyalists, however, saw the tragedy as proof that British troops were needed to control protesting colonists. A Boston lawyer named John Adams gained notoriety out of this tragedy. Although John Adams was a Patriot like his cousin Samuel, he also believed that every person, even the British soldiers, had the right to a fair trial. Adams agreed to defend the soldiers, even though he knew that his action would cost him friends and clients. At the murder trial, Adams argued that the troops had acted in self-defense.He claimed they had been threatened by the working-class and multi-racial “motley rabble” and, in particular, by Attucks, whom Adams described as physically menacing. The jury agreed and found six of the soldiers not guilty, while the remaining two of them were found guilty only of manslaughter, or causing death without meaning to. Throughout his long life, John Adams remained proud of his defense of the British soldiers. He said that upholding the law in this case was, “one of the best pieces of service I ever rendered to my country.” Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  Paul Revere’s famous engraving of the Boston Massacre stirred up deep colonial resentment against Great Britain. Patriots hoped that the massacre would spark protests against the British government. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  Paul Revere’s engraving of five coffins showing the victims of the Boston Massacre appeared on flyers to remind colonists of British brutality. 5. The Boston Tea Party Despite the hopes of Patriots like Sam Adams, the Boston Massacre did not spark larger protests against British rule. Instead, the repeal of the Townshend duties led to a period of calm. While there was still a small duty on tea, the tax didn't seem to bother Loyalists very much, and the Patriots knew they could always drink Dutch tea that had been smuggled into the colonies without paying duties. However, things did not stay peaceful. In 1773, a new law called the Tea Act prompted more protests. One of these protests became known as the Boston Tea Party. The Tea Act The Tea Act was Lord North's attempt to rescue the British East India Company. This large trading company controlled all the trade between Great Britain and Asia. Although it had been a moneymaker for Great Britain for years, the colonies' boycott of British tea hurt the company badly. By 1773, the company Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  was in danger of going broke unless it could sell the 17 million pounds of tea that were sitting in its London warehouses. The Tea Act lowered the cost of tea sold by the British East India Company in the colonies. As a result, even taxed British tea became cheaper than smuggled Dutch tea. Lord North thought he could persuade colonists to buy taxed tea by making it inexpensive, but colonists saw the Tea Act as another attempt to tax them without their consent. The Tea Act also gave the British East India Company a monopoly, or complete control, over tea sales in the colonies by controlling which merchants could sell the bargain-priced tea. This monopoly alarmed many merchants who wondered what the British government might try to control next. Would their next monopoly be on cloth or sugar? Nervous merchants worried about what would happen to their wealth if other goods were also restricted. Tea Ships Arrive When the British East India Company's tea ships sailed into American ports, protesters kept them from unloading their cargoes, causing more than one ship to turn back for England still filled with tea. In Boston, however, the royal governor ordered the British navy to block the exit from Boston Harbor, insisting that the three tea ships would not leave without unloading their tea. On December 16, 1773, the Sons of Liberty decided to unload the tea, but not in the way the governor had in mind. That night, about 60 men boarded the three ships. One of them, George Hewes, described what happened: We then were ordered by our commander to open the hatches and take out all the chests of tea and throw them overboard … and we immediately proceeded to execute his orders, … In about three hours from the time we went on board, we had thus broken and thrown overboard every tea chest to be found on the ship … We were surrounded by British armed ships, but no attempt was made to resist us. The Sons of Liberty dumped about 90,000 pounds of tea into the sea that night, leaving everything else aboard the ship untouched. News of the Boston Tea Party excited Patriots throughout the colonies. "This is the most magnificent moment of all," wrote John Adams in his journal the next day. "This destruction of the tea is so bold, so daring, so firm … it must have … important consequences." He was right. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  To protest the tax on tea, Patriots threw 342 chests of tea overboard from three British ships. Some protesters dressed in disguise as Mohawk or Narragansett people possibly to symbolize that they viewed themselves as Americans, not British subjects. 6. The Intolerable Acts The news of the Boston Tea Party stunned Lord North, who believed that he had helped the colonists by reducing the price of tea. Instead, the colonists destroyed the tea as a sign of protest, throwing hundreds of crates of it into the sea. For North, the colonists had gone too far. King George agreed with Lord North and recognized that the issue was not about taxes but about Great Britain’s control over the colonies. “We must master them,” he declared, “or totally leave them alone.” The king was not about to leave the colonies to themselves, however. In 1774, Great Britain’s anger led Parliament to pass a new series of laws that were so harsh that many colonists called them intolerable, or unbearable. Throughout the colonies, they became known as the Intolerable Acts. Parliament Punishes Massachusetts Great Britain wrote the Intolerable Acts to punish Massachusetts for the Boston Tea Party. The first law closed Boston Harbor to all shipping until the ruined tea was paid for. The second law placed the government of Massachusetts firmly under British control. Colonists in Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  Massachusetts could not even hold a town meeting without the colonial governor’s permission. The third law said that British soldiers who were accused of murder would be tried in England, not in the colonies. Finally, more troops were sent to Boston to enforce the new laws. A few British leaders worried that the Intolerable Acts might push the colonies into rebellion. But George III was sure they would force the colonists to give in to British authority. The Colonies Begin to Unite In fact, the Intolerable Acts did not force the colonists to give in. Boston Patriots declared they would “abandon their city to flames” before paying a penny for the lost tea. Colonists in other cities showed their support by closing their shops. They also decided to send food and money to Boston so that its citizens would not starve. In Virginia, lawmakers drafted a resolution in support of Massachusetts. The Virginians said that everyone’s rights were at stake. “An attack made on one of our sister colonies,” they declared, “is an attack made on all British America.” The Virginians also called for a congress, or meeting, of delegates from all the colonies. The purpose of the congress would be to find a peaceful solution to the conflicts with Great Britain. Not all Americans agreed with this plan. In every colony, there were Loyalists who thought that Bostonians had gone too far and should pay for the tea. If they were forced to choose, they would side with the king against Patriot protesters like Sam Adams and the Sons of Liberty. The First Continental Congress In September 1774, some 50 leaders from 12 colonies met in Philadelphia. Called the First Continental Congress, the meeting brought together delegates—all of whom were White, male property owners— from most of the British colonies on the North American continent. The delegates were used to thinking of themselves as citizens of their own colonies, but Patrick Henry, a leader from Virginia, urged them to come together as one people. “I am not a Virginian,” he declared, “but an American.” However, only deep-seated Patriots like Sam and John Adams were ready to think of themselves this way. Some delegates were strong Loyalists who still thought of themselves as British. Still others, like George Washington, were somewhere in between. Only one thing united the delegates—their hatred of British tyranny. In spite of their differences, the delegates agreed to send a respectful message to King George. The message urged the king to consider their complaints and to © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  recognize their rights. The delegates also called for a new boycott of British goods until Parliament repealed the Intolerable Acts. Finally, they agreed to meet again the following May if the boycott didn’t work. The Colonies Form Militias Patriots in towns and cities throughout the colonies organized boycotts against British goods. They also formed local militias in case the boycott did not work. In New England, the volunteers called themselves Minutemen because they could be ready to fight in 60 seconds. Across the colonies, militias marched and drilled. In New Hampshire, unknown persons stole 100 barrels of gunpowder and weapons from a British fort. Similar thefts occurred in other colonies. Rather than forcing the colonies to give in, the Intolerable Acts had brought the two sides to the brink of war. This present-day drawing depicts the scene at Boston Harbor during the time of the Intolerable Acts. The first of the Intolerable Acts closed Boston Harbor to all shipping until the destroyed tea was paid for. As a result, sailors and dockworkers Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  lost their jobs, and stores closed due to lack of goods to sell. Delegates from the colonies met in Philadelphia at the First Continental Congress in 1774. Patrick Henry of Virginia urged the colonists to unite as Americans, not as citizens of separate colonies. 7. Lexington and Concord King George had made many mistakes in his management of the colonies, which the First Continental Congress listed in their message to the king. However, rather than consider the colonists’ complaints, King George refused to answer their message. “The New England governments are in a state of rebellion,” he said. “Blows must decide whether they are to be subject to this country or independent.” In Boston, General Gage, the king’s commander of British troops in America, got ready to deliver those blows. The First Blow at Lexington In April 1775, a spy told General Gage that the colonists were hiding a large supply of gunpowder and weapons in the nearby village of Concord. General Gage decided to strike at once. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  The general ordered 700 of his best troops to march to Concord and seize the weapons. To keep the colonists from moving the weapons, the attack had to be a surprise, so Gage had his troops march the 20 miles to Concord at night. But the colonists had their own spies, and when Gage’s troops slipped out of Boston on April 18, 1775, Patriots were watching their every move. Soon, many Patriot messengers, among them Paul Revere, were galloping through the countryside, warning colonists that the British soldiers were coming. The news reached Lexington, a town on the road to Concord, in the early hours of April 19. Led by Captain John Parker, who was a farmer, a small band of Minutemen gathered nervously in the chilly night air. After their victory at Lexington, the British set off for Concord. The engraving shows their troops marching there. At Concord, the Minutemen engaged in another battle with the British. Surprised by the fury of the colonial attack, the British fled in panic. At dawn, the British troops reached the town green. “Stand your ground,” ordered Parker. “Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” As the Minutemen faced the British troops, a shot rang out—from where, no one knew for certain. Without orders, the soldiers rushed forward, shooting wildly, and a few Minutemen managed to return fire. When the firing stopped, eight colonists lay dead or dying, and another ten were left limping to safety with painful wounds. The British troops gave three cheers for Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  victory and continued their march to Concord. The Second Blow at Concord By breakfast time, the British were in Concord searching for gunpowder and weapons. However, the colonists had hidden them, and in frustration, the British soldiers piled up gun carriages and set them on fire. On a ridge outside the city, militiamen from the surrounding countryside watched the smoke rise. “Will you let them burn the town down?” shouted one man. Captain Isaac Davis replied, “I haven’t a man that’s afraid to go.” Davis marched with his volunteers down the hill, and as they approached Concord’s North Bridge, the British troops opened fire fatally striking Davis in the chest. The British expected the colonists to break and run, but to their surprise, the Minutemen stood their ground and fired back. Soon, it was the British falling back. The retreat back to Boston was a nightmare for the British because thousands of armed and angry Minutemen lined their route, shooting at every redcoat they saw. Some accounts show that by the end of the day, 74 British soldiers were dead and another 200 were wounded or missing, while the colonists counted their own losses at 49 dead and 41 wounded. A British officer described what it was like to face the colonists’ fury that day. “Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob,” the officer said, “will find himself much mistaken.” Indeed, since the French and Indian War, the British had been mistaken about the colonists again and again. Their biggest mistake was in thinking that everyday people would not fight against oppression. At Lexington and Concord, colonists proved they were not only willing to fight for their rights; they were even willing to die for them. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  This engraving shows American colonists defending themselves and tending to the wounded as the British attack Lexington. This was the first battle in the war for independence from Great Britain. Lesson Summary In this lesson, you read about tensions between the colonies and Great Britain in the mid-1700s. Before 1763 During the French and Indian War (1754–1763), Great Britain and France fought over Indigenous territory in North America. When the war ended, France gave its claimed land to Great Britain, greatly expanding Britain’s American empire. Early British Actions in the Colonies Great Britain amassed huge debts to fight the Seven Years’ War. To raise money, Parliament passed along the war costs to the colonies, enacting the Stamp Act in 1765. Colonists protested the Stamp Act because the British Parliament passed it without colonial representa-tion. Colonists also protested the Quartering Act, which required them to house British troops at the colonies’ expense. The Townshend Acts and the Boston Massacre Great Britain imposed more taxes on the colonies through the Townshend Acts, which divided many colonists into opposing camps. Loyalists urged obedi-ence to Great Britain, but Patriots resisted “taxation without representation” through protests, boycotts, and riots. Tensions Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  in Boston erupted into violence in 1770 when British troops fired into a crowd of colonists in what became known as the Boston Massacre. The Boston Tea Party and the Intolerable ActsWhen Patriots protested a new tax on tea by throwing tea into Boston Harbor in 1773, Great Britain responded by passing the Intolerable Acts to force the colonies to give in to British authority. The colonies responded by forming the First Continental Congress and organizing colonial militias. Lexington and Concord Fighting between Patriots and British troops at Lexington and Concord in 1775 showed that colonists would not only fight for their rights, but were willing to die for them. Crispus Attucks was the first person killed in the Boston Massacre. This image of him was created in 1897, long after the end of the Civil War. Exploring Literature "I Love the Story of Paul Revere, © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  Whether He Rode or Not" So said President Warren G. Harding in 1923. Like most Americans at that time, Harding probably learned about Revere as a child, when he read a famous poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Later, when a skeptic claimed the story of Revere's ride never happened, Harding sprang to the poet's defense. But was Revere the patriotic hero Longfellow made him out to be? By 1860, the young nation that fought for freedom from British rule was in danger of falling apart. War clouds gathered as the South threatened to leave the Union so it could continue enslaving Black people to bolster its economy. The country was close to civil war. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, who was then the nation's most popular poet, was a Northerner who deeply opposed the institution of slavery. He gave money from his writing to Black institutions and to Black men, women, and children. As he watched the nation move toward war, Longfellow began thinking about writing a new poem that would be a call to arms for the Union to once again defend liberty from tyranny. One day in April 1860, as Longfellow took a walk with a friend in Boston, his Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  companion told him a story that took place on another April day, some 85 years earlier. It was the tale of a midnight ride made by a silversmith named Paul Revere to alert the countryside to coming danger. The tale inspired Longfellow. Like Paul Revere's ride, the poem he planned would be a cry of alarm to awaken a sleeping nation. Longfellow's finished work, titled "Paul Revere's Ride," was published in 1861. Longfellow Creates a Legend: The Lone Hero Before the poem, Paul Revere's role in the war was not well-known. In fact, the ride was not even mentioned in his obituary. Longfellow did not set out to write a history. He wanted to create a dramatic tale that would inspire the Union and the movement to end enslavement. In the process, he transformed Revere from a little known folk hero into a national legend. Today, millions of Americans know the opening lines of Longfellow's poem, but few know his intentions behind the poem. As you read the excerpt that follows, consider why the poem captured readers' imaginations. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE  Others Ride: A Story of Working Together Paul Revere did not work alone.Alerting the community that British troops were on the move was a collaborative, or group, effort. Although the names of many riders have been lost to history, the stories of several are known today. Israel Bissel continued the ride started by Revere, Samuel Prescott, and William Dawes. He traveled from Lexington to Hartford and possibly as far as Philadelphia to spread the news of the Concord attack. Sixteen-year-old Sybil Ludington, the child of a colonel in the militia, rode through the night to warn local Minutemen that the British were raiding Danbury, Connecticut. She is reported to have ridden around 40 miles to alert neighboring towns and villages. While visiting her husband and sons in jail, Jane Black Thomas overheard a conversation between Loyalist women that caught her attention. They were talking about a planned Loyalist attack on Patriots near her home. She then rode 60 miles to warn her son and other Patriots that Loyalists were coming. Skeptics Raise Doubts: Did Revere Really Ride? Historians have long pointed out many factual inaccuracies in Longfellow's telling. For example, the poet omitted Revere's capture by British troops while raising the alarm. Longfellow also left out the names of other messengers who participated that night, such as Dawes and Prescott. As doubts about the poem's truthfulness multiplied through the years, skeptics began to question the entire story. Some said Revere's ride did not happen at all. Or if it did, British troops captured Revere before he could warn many Patriots. Historians Weigh In: The Real Meaning of Revere's Ride Although Paul Revere is among the best-known Patriots for his role in the battle of Lexington, historians remind us that Revere was not the only hero of that momentous night. Within hours of his ride, 122 colonists had lost their lives and many more lay wounded. As one historian writes, Revere's ride was not the major event that day, nor was Revere's warning so critical in triggering the bloodbath. Patriotic farmers had been preparing to oppose the British for the better part of a year … His ride to Lexington … took on meaning only because numerous other Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute  TOWARDINDEPENDENCE political activists had, like Revere, dedicated themselves to the cause. —Ray Raphael, Founding Myths: Stories that Hide Our Patriotic Past, 2004 The real meaning of Revere's ride is what it tells us about these everyday people. On hearing that the British soldiers were coming, those farmers had a choice. They could remain safe in their beds or rise up to defend their rights. Looking at their response, historian David Hackett Fischer writes, "The history of a free people is the history of hard choices." © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute  TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Governance in the Colonies The American Revolution brought great change to the colonies, especially in the way they were governed. But, how were colonial governments established before the fight for independence began? Colonial Government Prior to the American Revolution Before the American Revolution, the colonies of the Americas all had differing forms of government dependent on their founder and British involvement. Let’s explore these colonial governments. Massachusetts Massachusetts had a more democratic government than most countries in Europe. At first, only Puritan men could vote, but later, all men who owned land could vote. However, Puritan women could not vote and were expected to obey their fathers and husbands. To solve local problems, the colonists met at town meetings and made decisions by majority rule. This was the first truly democratic form of local government in the colonies. Settlers elected representatives to the colony’s lawmaking body. John Winthrop was elected governor 12 times between 1630 and 1649. Rhode Island From its start, Rhode Island offered people religious freedom. In 1631, a young minister named Roger Williams began to criticize the Puritan leaders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. He thought that government and religion should be separate. Because of this, the leaders forced him to leave the colony in 1635. Williams spent the winter with some Native Americans. In 1636, he started a town called Providence, which later became the capital of Rhode Island. Rhode Island welcomed people with different religious beliefs to live in the colony and it became one of the most democratic colonies. At first, most men could vote for the colony’s governor and local officials. Later on, only men who owned property could vote, but they did not have to practice a certain religion. Pennsylvania Like the Puritans, the Quakers were a religious group whose beliefs set them at odds with the official church in England. Quakers had no priests or ministers and  would not fight in wars. English Quaker William Penn was jailed several times for © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE his beliefs. He wanted to start a colony where Quakers could live safely. In 1681, England’s King Charles II granted land in North America to Penn, which he used to found Pennsylvania. The king approved Penn’s appointment of the colony’s governor. An assembly met to pass or reject laws made by a council. All men who owned property could vote for members of the General Assembly. In 1696, the colony became more democratic when the elected members of the Assembly gained the power to write laws. New York The colony that the British named New York was first settled by the Dutch. The Dutch came to the area to set up fur-trading posts. The British, however, wanted this land for themselves so that British settlers in New England could create new trade routes. In 1664, the British captured the colony, and England’s king gave the land to his brother, the Duke of York. Colonists had little power in New York’s government. Governors appointed by the king were controlled by England, and the governor appointed other officials and enforced the laws. Maryland Cecilius Calvert, an English nobleman also known as Lord Baltimore, started the colony of Maryland in 1634. While he hoped to make money from the colony, he also wanted to provide a safe place for Catholics like himself. In England and in some of the colonies, Catholics were treated harshly. However, most colonists had little power in Maryland’s government. Lord Baltimore made his brother, Leonard Calvert, the governor of the colony. Calvert made the decisions until 1637, when he allowed the colony to have an assembly. For the most part, only White men with property voted for members of the assembly. Over time, more non-Catholics moved to the colony. Calvert had the assembly pass a law to protect Catholics’ right to vote and to serve in the government. These rights were denied to Catholics in some of the other colonies. Georgia The Southern Colony of Georgia was the last colony founded by Great Britain in 1732. At first, only the rich men who had started the colony took part in government. They passed laws that they thought were best for the colony. In 1752, the colonists gave Great Britain’s King George II control of Georgia. The king allowed White male voters to elect an assembly, but he could overturn any law the assembly passed. Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Patriot and Loyalist Views The power that Great Britain had over the colonies led to the question of independence. While historians disagree about how many colonists chose to be either Patriots or Loyalists, almost all believe that there were many more Patriots than Loyalists. However, it is likely that less than half of the colonists were Patriots while others remained neutral. The Loyalists included many kinds of people, some of whom were rich landowners. They feared that Patriot mobs might take their property. Some Loyalists were governors who had been appointed to their jobs by King George III. These men liked their government, and they felt that it was their duty to make sure that British laws were obeyed in the colonies. Other Loyalists were religious leaders who believed that the king’s power came from God. Many of them were members of the Church of England, Great Britain’s official church. They believed that it was wrong to oppose the king and told their followers that they had a duty to be loyal to the church and to the king. Patriots aimed to resist the tyranny of the king and often thought that Great Britain was taking advantage of them. They believed that colonists deserved specific inalienable rights and would have more freedom and security if they had their own nation. Many colonists were Patriots, including merchants who lived in and around the city of Boston. They were angry about British taxes on goods such as tea and paper. The taxes greatly affected their businesses because of colonist boycotts against these taxes. Some Patriots were farmers, while others were people who worked at crafts such as printing and shipbuilding. Many believed that independence would bring more wealth to the colonies. Other Patriots were lawyers, who fought in the courts against British laws that they thought were unfair. They believed that the colonists should have more representation and say in making laws. The Seven Years' War The Seven Years' War lasted from 1756 to 1763 and involved multiple nations in Europe. The war was primarily fought between Great Britain and France for political power and control over everything from European politics to colonization across the world. Just two years prior to the spark of this world-spanning conflict, the French and Indian War had broken out in North America between Great Britain and France. Ultimately, it would only be part of a broader conflict.  Colonial rivalry and trade competition had certainly soured relations between the French and British, but it was events in Europe that truly sparked the conflict. The © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE two countries had competed for influence in central Europe, pitting German states and principalities against each other and vied for power in a complex web of competing interests until eventually war broke out. The war's impact on North America both came before and resulted from the broader Seven Years' War. In North America, the Battle of Quebec proved to be a major turning point. As many as 11,000 British and American troops began with a siege of Quebec City that lasted for three months. Quebec was defended by about 18,000 troops, but most were Canadian militia with no experience. Prior to the battle itself, the British bombarded the city and sailed past it along the St. Lawrence River. British troops landed shortly after and cut off access to Montreal for those in Quebec City. The British won the Battle of Quebec, forcing the French out of Canada and eventually out of North America entirely. By 1763, the warring powers were ready for peace. The Treaty of Paris was signed that year (not to be confused with the 1783 Treaty of Paris that ended the American Revolution) and ended hostilities between France and Great Britain. It resulted in France losing most of its North American possessions. France had separately signed a secret deal with Spain to take over the remainder of its North American territories but Spain did not do so until later. The Treaty of Paris also resulted in a promise from  the British to tolerate Roman Catholicism in the Western hemisphere. Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Carrying out war across North America, Europe, and India was incredibly costly. The British Navy had to not only fight battles, but also transport troops to hold and fight in different regions. The cost of food, munitions, travel, and supplies was a massive burden on the British economy. By the end of the war, interest payments on debt accounted for over half of the budget of the Crown's government. That would lead to the British enacting taxes and duties on the North American colonies, ultimately resulting in the American Revolution. The Sugar Act (1764) The Sugar Act of 1764 was implemented with the intention of raising revenue for Great Britain. The act placed a tax on sugar and other goods brought into the colonies as a way to raise funds to pay for the Seven Years War. An excerpt from the act is below. … Whereas it is expedient that new provisions and regulations should be established for improving the revenue of this kingdom, and for extending and securing the navigation and commerce between Great Britain and your Majesty's dominions in America, which, by the peace, have been so happily enlarged: and whereas it is just and necessary, that a revenue be raised, in your Majesty's said dominions in America, for defraying the expences of defending, protecting, and securing the same; we, your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the commons of Great Britain, in parliament assembled, being desirous to make some provision, in this present session of parliament, towards raising the said revenue in America, have resolved to give and grant unto your Majesty the several rates and duties herein after-mentioned; and do most humbly beseech your Majesty that it may be enacted; and be it enacted by the King's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That from and after the twenty ninth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and sixty four, there shall be raised, levied, collected, and paid, unto his Majesty, his heirs and successors, for and upon all white or clayed sugars of the produce or manufacture of any colony or plantation in America, not under the dominion of his Majesty, his heirs and successors; for and upon indigo, and coffee of foreign produce or manufacture; for and upon wines (except French wine;) for and upon all wrought silks, bengals, and stuffs, mixed with silk or herbs of the manufacture of Persia, China, or East India, and all callico painted, dyed, printed, or stained there; and for and upon all foreign linen cloth called Cambrick and French Lawns, which shall be imported or brought into any colony or plantation in America, which now is, or hereafter may be, under the dominion of his Majesty, his heirs and successors, the several rates and duties following; that is to say,  For every hundred weight avoirdupois of such foreign white or clayed sugars, one © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE pound two shillings, over and above all other duties imposed by any former act of parliament. For every pound weight avoirdupois of such foreign indigo, six pence. For every hundred weight avoirdupois of such foreign coffee, which shall be imported from any place, except Great Britain, two pounds, nineteen shillings, and nine pence. For every ton of wine of the growth of the Madeiras, or of any other island or place from whence such wine may be lawfully imported, and which shall be so imported from such islands or place, the sum of seven pounds. For every ton of Portugal, Spanish, or any other wine (except French wine) imported from Great Britain, the sum of ten shillings. For every pound weight avoirdupois of wrought silks, bengals, and stuffs, mixed silk or herbs, of the manufacture of Persia, China, or East India, imported from Great Britain, two shillings. For every piece of callico painted, dyed, printed, or stained, in Persia, China, or East India, imported from Great Britain, two shillings and six pence. For every piece of foreign linen cloth, called Cambrick, imported from Great Britain, three shillings. For every piece of French lawn imported from Great Britain, three shillings. And after those rates for any greater or lesser quantity of such goods respectively. II. And it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the said twenty ninth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and sixty four, there shall also be raised, levied, collected, and paid, unto his Majesty, his heirs and successors, for and upon all coffee and pimento of the growth and produce of any British colony or plantation in America, which shall be there laden on board any British ship or vessel, to be carried out from thence to any other place whatsoever, except Great Britain, the several rates and duties following; that is to say, III. For every hundred weight avoirdupois of such British coffee, seven shillings. For every pound weight avoirdupois of such British pimento, one halfpenny.  IV. And whereas an act was made in the sixth year of the reign of his late majesty King George the Second, intituled, An act for the better securing and encouraging the trade of his Majesty's sugar colonies in America, which was to continue in force for five years, Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE to be computed from the twenty fourth day of June, one thousand seven hundred and thirty three, and to the end of the then next session of parliament, and which, by several subsequent acts made in the eleventh, the nineteenth, the twenty sixth, and twenty ninth, and the thirty first years of the reign of his said late Majesty, was, from time to time, continued; and, by an act made in the first year of the reign of his present Majesty, was further continued until the end of this present session of parliament; and although the said act hath been found in some degree useful, yet it is highly expedient that the same should be altered, enforced, and made more effectual; but, in consideration of the great distance of several of the said colonies and plantations from this kingdom, it will be proper further to continue the said act for a short space, before any alterations and amendments shall take effect, in order that all persons concerned may have due and proper notice thereof; be it therefore enacted by the authority aforesaid, That the said act made in the sixth year of the reign of his late majesty King George the Second, intituled, An act for the better securing and encouraging the trade of his Majesty's sugar colonies in America, shall be, and the same is hereby further continued, until the thirtieth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and sixty four. V. And it be further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from the twenty ninth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and sixty four, the said act, subject to such alterations and amendments as are herein after contained, shall be, and the same is hereby made perpetual…. XLIV. And it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the said twenty ninth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and sixty four, no person shall be admitted to enter a claim to any ship or goods seized in pursuance of this or any other act of parliament, and prosecuted in any of the British colonies or plantations in America, until sufficient security be first given, by persons of known ability, in the court where such seizure is prosecuted, in the penalty of sixty pounds, to answer the costs and charges of prosecution; and, in default of giving such security, such ship or goods shall be adjudged to be forfeited, and shall be condemned. XLV. And it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the twenty ninth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and sixty four, if any ship or goods shall be seized for any cause of forfeiture, and any dispute shall arise whether the customs and duties for such goods have been paid, or the same have been lawfully imported or exported, or concerning the growth, product, or manufacture, of such goods, or the place from whence such goods were brought, then, and in such cases, the proof thereof shall lie upon the owner or claimer of such ship or goods, and not upon the officer who shall seize or stop the same; any law, custom, or usage, any law, custom, or usage, to  the contrary notwithstanding. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE XLVI. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the twenty ninth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and sixty four, in case any information shall be commenced and brought to trial in America, on account of any seizure of any ship or goods as forfeited by this or any other act of parliament relating to his Majesty's customs, wherein a verdict or sentence shall be given for the claimer thereof; and it shall appear to the judge or court before whom the same shall be tried, that there was a probable cause of seizure, the judge or court before whom the same shall be tried shall certify on the record or other proceedings, that there was a probable cause for the prosecutors seizing the said ship or goods; and, in such case, the defendant shall not be intitled to any costs of suit whatsoever; nor shall the person who seized the said ship or goods, be liable to any action, or other suit or prosecution, on account of such seizure: and in any case any action, or other suit or prosecution, shall be commenced and brought to trial against any person or persons whatsoever, on account of the seizing any such ship or goods, where no information shall be commenced or brought to trial to condemn the same, and a verdict or sentence shall be given upon such action or prosecution against the defendant or defendants, if the court or judge before whom such action or prosecution, shall certify in like manner as aforesaid that there was a probable cause for such seizure, then the plaintiff besides his ship or goods so seized, or the value thereof, shall not be intitled to above two pence damages, nor to any costs of suit; nor shall the defendant in such prosecution be fined above one shilling. XLVII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any action or suit shall be commenced, either in Great Britain or America, against any person or persons for any thing done in pursuance of this or any other act of parliament relating to his Majesty's customs, the defendant or defendants in such action or suit may plead the general issue, and give the said acts, and the special matter, in evidence at any trial to be had thereupon, and that the same was done in pursuance and by the authority of such act; and if it shall appear so to have been done, the jury shall find for the defendant or defendants; and if the plaintiff shall be non-suited, or discontinue his action after the defendant or defendants shall have appeared, or if judgment shall be given upon verdict or demurrer against the plaintiff, the defendant or defendants shall recover treble costs, and have the like remedy for the same as defendants have in other cases by law.... __________________________________________________ Sugar Act 1764 excerpt from The Avalon Project at Yale Law School Entire Selection: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/sugar_act_1764.asp Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE Accessed July, 2019 Choosing Sides The American Revolution divided the colonists and the British into two sides: the Patriots and the Loyalists. The Patriots were Americans who believed that the colonies had the right to self-govern. Although many Patriots believed in English legal traditions, they thought British laws were unjust. In particular, many were driven by their strong opposition to taxation without representation. Others more generally thought that the colonies should be a democracy. Some came to view Britain as a foreign power that treated colonists like second-class citizens. The Loyalists were supporters of British rule over the colonies. Even though some disagreed with certain laws passed by Parliament, many believed that Britain had the right to rule its colonies how it wanted. They also thought the colonies could not survive without Britain. They believed that government would breakdown and that colonists would fight among themselves. Some simply did not share Patriots’ concerns or political views. When the war began, the Patriots were poorly organized with an untrained army. In fighting the war, the Patriots hoped to gain independent economic and political control, as British taxation and overbearing rule had frustrated many colonists. The British, meanwhile, maintained a professional army with hired mercenaries from Germany. The British sought to maintain control over the colonies, as it was a strong source of revenue for the monarchy. The American Revolution played out on many battlefields, but soldiers were not the only ones to take part. Women gave much to the American Revolution. Enslaved Africans and Indigenous people were also involved. Women and the War During the war, women had a key role in maintaining necessary societal functions and shaping the future generation. Though the war was a destructive force, many women carried on and ran family businesses. They planted and harvested crops. They did their best to take care of their children. Many women served as spies for the Patriot army, while others nursed the sick and wounded. A nurse had a greater chance of dying from disease than a soldier had of dying in battle. Some women used their household skills for the war. For instance, women in Philadelphia led an effort to raise money and make clothing for the troops. Women also helped win public support for the war. Writer Mercy Otis Warren was one example, and so was Mary Katherine Goddard of Maryland, who helped © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A TOWARDINDEPENDENCE publish a newspaper. Some women traveled with the troops, cared for them, and, in a few cases, took part in combat as well. Anna Lane was wounded at the Battle of Germantown in 1777. Deborah Sampson dressed as a male soldier and fought in several battles. She enlisted so that “we [women] might be permitted and acknowledged to enjoy what we had so nobly declared we would possess, or lose with our lives—freedom and independence.” Only when she became sick with a fever did an army doctor discover her secret. Mary Ludwig Hays McCauley, known as Molly Pitcher, took her husband’s place as a gunner when he was hurt at the Battle of Monmouth in 1778. Most notably, however, was the notion of the “republican mothers.” This was the idea that the colonies needed intelligent and self-disciplined citizens to form a strong foundation for the new republic after the end of the war. This duty was passed along to wives and mothers, who were responsible for raising their sons to be these intelligent and self-sufficient individuals. This desire for strong political figures for the new government increased women’s sphere of influence during the American Revolution. African Americans and the War In 1776, there were around 500,000 people enslaved in the 13 American colonies. The American Revolution brought them challenges, choices, and opportunities. The British offered freedom to enslaved people who joined their side. Tens of thousands of enslaved African Americans were motivated to join the war efforts with this offer and escaped enslavement. Many gave valuable service to the British by fighting in battle, serving as spies, and performing many jobs in army camps. Some enslaved people did, in fact, win their freedom. However, running away was risky. Sometimes, the British turned away fugitives from slavery who wanted to join them and even forced away many during the Battle of Yorktown. Many fugitives from slavery who sought freedom with British starved or died from disease, while others were caught and returned to their enslavers. Some African Americans fought for the Patriot cause in hopes of earning their freedom and proving their worth. It is estimated that at least 5,000 Black soldiers fought for the Patriots. Additionally, 5 percent of American soldiers at the Battle of Bunker Hill were African American. In 1775, a Black soldier named Salem Poor became a hero after fighting at the Battle of Bunker Hill in Boston. Early in the American Revolution, African Americans could not join the Patriot ranks. In part, this was because some White colonists did not want to arm enslaved people, but this worry faded as the war dragged on. African Americans also helped the Patriot cause off the battlefield, too. One example is James Armistead who served as a spy and pretended to serve the Level: A © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute TOWARDINDEPENDENCE British. For his work, Armistead won his freedom. After the war, the military service of African Americans helped to end slavery in New England, whereas New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey adopted policies of gradual emancipation over two decades beginning in 1780. However, freed African Americans still experienced constant discrimination. In the South, cotton soon developed into a major industry, and slavery persisted for decades. Indigenous People and the War Indigenous people were also affected by the American Revolution. They viewed both the colonists and the British as a threat. A few Indigenous groups helped fight on the side of the colonists. Others sided with the British because they were considered less of a threat to their way of life than the colonists were. Some, such as the Mohawk, were promised land in Canada in exchange for support. Indigenous groups that sided with British hoped that if the British won the war, they would stop colonial expansion westward into Indigenous territory. In response to an American request for assistance with the war effort, one O-non dowa-gah (Seneca) warrior even argued that “You say they are all mad, foolish, wicked, and deceitful—I say you are so and they are wise for you want us to destroy ourselves in your War and they advise us to live in Peace.” Many Indigenous people, however, tried to stay out of the war. In fact, they hoped that the two sides would weaken each other, which in turn would help Indigenous people maintain their land and sovereignty. Staying out of the war proved difficult as few Indigenous groups could avoid being caught in the fighting. Neither the British nor the Americans fully trusted Indigenous people, and each side punished groups harshly for helping the other side. Furthermore, both the American and British troops often raided Indigenous villages to take food supplies. As a result, hunger among the Indigenous was widespread. By the war’s end, many Indigenous groups were struggling to survive. The Patriot victory had only made things worse. The British had previously tried to slow western settlement, but with the end of British rule, White settlers were again pushing west, moving in large numbers onto Indigenous lands. This led to many Indigenous groups being forcibly removed from their land. Others were forced to integrate into White American society by White settlers. The culture and traditions of Indigenous people were at risk. © 2024 Teachers' Curriculum Institute Level: A