RS#29

Day

History Lab

Should the colonists have

revolted against Great Britain?

How do real historians figure out what happened in the past?They conduct research using

documents from the past.Let me

show you what I mean.

Analyze this historical painting.Generate your own questions to get to the truth.

Did you miss any questions?1. Who painted this?2. Who was the painter painting for?3. Who is in the painting?4. What does this painting show?5.Where does the scene in this painting take place?6. When was this painting created? When does the scene take place?7. Why did the painter choose to paint this scene?8. How did the painter create this painting?9. What’s the main action the foreground?10. Why was this section highlighted?11. What else and who else do you see in the background? 12. What perspective does this represent?

“Battle of Bunker Hill” by John Trumbull

Trumbull’s Own Words". . . This painting represents the moment when (the Americans having expended their ammunition) the British troops became completely successful and masters of the field. At this last moment of the action, Gen. Warren was killed by a musket ball through the head. The principal group represents him expiring, a soldier on his knees supports him, and with one hand wards off the bayonet of a British grenadier, . . . Col. Small . . . is represented seizing the musket of the grenadier, to prevent the fatal blow, . . . Near this side of the painting is seen General Putnam, reluctantly ordering the retreat of these brave men; ... Behind Col. Small is seen Major Pitcairn, of the British marines, mortally wounded, and falling in the arms of his son, . . . Under the heel of Col. Small lies the dead body of Col. Abercrombie. Gen. Howe, who commanded the British troops, and Gen. Clinton, . . . are seen behind the principal group."

Who Was John Trumbull?• June 6, 1756 – November 10, 1843• an American artist during the period

of the American Revolutionary War• his Declaration of Independence was

used on the reverse of the two-dollar bill.

• soldier in the American Revolutionary War (sketched plans of British works and witnessed the Battle of Bunker Hill)

• appointed second personal aide to General George Washington

What do you remember about the American Revolution and the Battle of Bunker Hill? Does this painting depict this event accurately? Is there any other information we can glean from this picture that we didn’t already know?

What focus questions do we need to ask in order to answer our overarching

question?

Should the colonists have revolted against Great

Britain?

Focus QuestionsWhose perspective did John Trumbull

represent?Are there other perspectives to consider?Who else was living in the colonies at that

time?What was the white female perspective?What was the white male perspective?What was the enslaved African perspective?What was the Native American perspective?What was the Patriot perspective?What was the Loyalist perspective?What was the neutral perspective?

What sources can we use to find the answers to our

focus questions?

Possible Sources

InternetTextbooksLibraryExpertNewspapers

PaintingsDiariesPamphletsSongsSpeeches

Some sources will be primary and some will be

secondary?What’s the difference

between the two? Is one better to use than another?

Primary Sources…are artifacts, documents, recordings, or other sources of information that were created at the time under study. It serves as an original source of information about the topic.

Examples of Primary Sources• Diary• Recording• Letter• Painting• Film• Emails• Photographs

• Music• Art• Poetry• Clothing• Buildings• DNA

Secondary Sources…provide interpretation and analysis of primary sources. Secondary sources are one step removed from the original event or "horse's mouth."

Examples of Secondary Sources• Encyclopedia• Newspaper• Magazine• Textbook• Literary

Criticism• Commentarie

s

Let’s Get Started! I’ll show you how historians perform close readings on

the documents they use.

What was the white male

perspective?

Here is your first document:

Let me show you how to think like a historian.

You must follow the clues to find the answers you seek. What is the white male perspective? Do they think the colonies should revolt from

Great Britain?

Hmm…first I notice that it’s a sort of book. No wait! It’s a pamphlet!

I see the word “America”, so I’m thinking it has to do with our country. When I look closer, it says, “addressed to the inhabitants of America,” so the author is writing this to

everyone in America.

I notice the title, Common Sense. I know that Common Sense is an important text that greatly influenced people’s opinions

during the Revolutionary period. I even notice the date on the bottom that says, “1776.” Hmm…that’s when the

Declaration of Independence was written.

I also notice a photograph with the words “Thomas Paine” underneath. I know this is

the author of this text.

Now that I have examined the front cover, it’s time to look inside. When we read documents as historians, we want to think about what the

text is trying to tell us. Specifically, we are trying to discover the white male perspective

about whether the colonists should have revolted against Great Britain.

Let’s read the first paragraph. Of Monarchy and Hereditary SuccessionIn the early ages of the world, according to the Bible there were no kings; the consequence of which was, there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throws mankind into confusion. Holland, without a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe…

Wow, Paine really seems to dislike kings. Of Monarchy and Hereditary SuccessionIn the early ages of the world, according to the Bible there were no kings; the consequence of which was, there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throws mankind into confusion. Holland, without a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe…

Kings = Wars

Hm…I don’t know…Sounds like an opinion. Does Paine include facts to back that up? Of Monarchy and Hereditary SuccessionIn the early ages of the world, according to the Bible there were no kings; the consequence of which was, there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throws mankind into confusion. Holland, without a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe… I wonder if we could find sources to back that

up.

Let’s read paragraph 2. Government by kings was first introduced into the world by the people who didn’t know God. It was the most prosperous invention the devil ever set on foot for the promotion of worshipping kings rather than God…How disrespectful is the title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust!

Wow! What an attitude!Paine uses really strong language here.

Government by kings was first introduced into the world by the people who didn’t know God. It was the most prosperous invention the devil ever set on foot for the promotion of worshipping kings rather than God…How disrespectful is the title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust!

I get the feeling that Paine wouldn’t follow a king because he says that kings were created by people who don’t believe in God. I wonder why

he hates them so much. Let’s keep reading.

Let’s read paragraphs3 and 4.

Another evil which attends succession is that the throne can be held by a minor at any age…The same national misfortune happens when a king worn out with age and frailty enters the last stage of human weakness. In both these cases the public becomes a prey to every villain who can interfere successfully with the aged or youthful king/queen.

Let’s read paragraphs3 and 4.

In short, monarchy and succession have laid but the world in blood and ashes. It is a form of government which God is against, and blood will result.

Well, that answers our question! Paine says a monarchy is evil because kings and queens inherit the throne at any age—so you could

have a really young king or a really old king. Then the public becomes prey to villainous people in the king’s court who try to take

advantage of the king’s age.

Another evil which attends succession is that the throne can be held by a minor at any age…The same national misfortune happens when a king worn out with age and frailty enters the last stage of human weakness. In both these cases the public becomes a prey to every villain who can interfere successfully with the aged or youthful king/queen.

Paine doesn’t seem to have faith in the process of a monarchy. He believes

they just result in blood.

In short, monarchy and succession have laid but the world in blood and ashes. It is a form of government which God is against, and blood will result.

Let’s read the next paragraph.

Thoughts on the Present State of American AffairsBut Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame upon her conduct. Even beasts do not devour their young, nor bloodthirsty people make war upon their families…Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America. This new World provide protection for the punished lovers of liberty from EVERY PART of Europe. They fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster…

MONSTERS! Look at the word choice again. I can tell Paine is ashamed of his country because he’s using a metaphor to compare Britain to beasts

eating their children, bloodthirsty people making war on their families, and monsters.

Thoughts on the Present State of American AffairsBut Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame upon her conduct. Even beasts do not devour their young, nor bloodthirsty people make war upon their families…Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America. This new World provided protection for the punished lovers of liberty from EVERY PART of Europe. They fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster…

So if Britain is the parent country, then the colonies are the children. Paine is trying to

paint a visual image of the relationship between Britain and the colonies—it’s not a

very healthy one!Thoughts on the Present State of American AffairsBut Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame upon her conduct. Even beasts do not devour their young, nor bloodthirsty people make war upon their families…Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America. This new World hath provided protection for the punished lovers of liberty from EVERY PART of Europe. They fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster…

Let’s read the last two paragraphs.I challenge the warmest supporter of peace with Great Britain to show a single advantage that this continent can reap by being connected with Great Britain…Our corn will fetch its price in any market in Europe, and our imported goods must be paid for…

A government of our own is our natural right.

Paine doesn’t think that the colonies need to be dependent on Britain anymore. He

believes…I challenge the warmest supporter of peace with Great Britain to show a single advantage that this continent can reap by being connected with Great Britain…Our corn will fetch its price in any market in Europe, and our imported goods must be paid for…

A government of our own is our natural right.

So what is commonsense to Thomas

Paine?

It is common sense that the colonies should rule

themselves. It does not make sense for the colonies to be

ruled by a king.

Based on Paine’s text, what is his perspective on whether the colonies should revolt against

Great Britain?

Paine thinks the colonists should revolt, because he believes the colonies should rule themselves instead of being ruled by a king.

He finds fault with monarchies and thinks that kings cause war and the worshipping of false idols. Also, old and young kings can be manipulated by evil people who will destroy

the country. Basically, monarchies go against God and cause bloodshed and it is

only natural that the colonies have the right to their own government.

So, what strategies do historians use to analyze

historical documents?

Let’s write them in a chart to hang in our

classroom.

Strategies Historians Use to Analyze Historical DocumentsIdentify the type of document

Identify the author and any relevant information about the author

Identify the date and historical contextIdentify the audienceIdentify the purpose for writingLook for clues in the text that help to identify the

author’s perspectivesWord choiceToneFacts and opinionsInferences

Connect the text back to the title

Here’s a mini poster for you:

Let’s make a folder to keep our logs in.

Name

Should the colonists have

revolted against Great Britain?

Here’s our big

question

Here’s your mini poster. Glue it on.

Don’t forget your

name!

At the end of our unit we will have a debate about whether the colonists should revolt from Great Britain. Save all your work in this folder so you will be able to refer back to the documents we will study.

AssessmentDo you agree with

Paine? Explain why or why not, using specific

text support from Common Sense.

Thumbs up? Thumbs down?

Should the colonists have revolted against Great Britain?

What was the white male perspective?

Wrap Up Discussion: How much progress have we made so far in answering the focus

question?

Do you think Paine’s perspective represents the

only white male perspective?

What could we as historians do to gain a better

understanding of the white male perspective?