Transcript History Lab

RS#29
Should the colonists
have revolted against
Great Britain?
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
". . . 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."
• 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
Should the colonists have
revolted against Great
Britain?
Focus Questions
Whose 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?

Possible Sources
 Internet
Paintings
 Textbooks
Diaries
 Library
Pamphlets
 Expert
Songs
 Newspapers
Speeches
What’s the
difference between
the two? Is one
better to use than
another?
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.
• Diary
• Music
• Recording
• Art
• Letter
• Poetry
• Painting
• Clothing
• Film
• Buildings
• Emails
• DNA
• Photographs
provide interpretation and
analysis of primary sources.
Secondary sources are one step
removed from the original event
or "horse's mouth."
• Encyclopedia
• Newspaper
• Magazine
• Textbook
• Literary
Criticism
• Commentaries
What was the white
male perspective?
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?
Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession
In 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…
Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession
In 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
Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession
In 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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thoughts on the Present State of American
Affairs
But 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…
Thoughts on the Present State of American Affairs
But 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…
Thoughts on the Present State of American Affairs
But 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…
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.
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.
It is common sense that the colonies
should rule themselves. It does not
make sense for the colonies to be
ruled by a king.
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.
Let’s write them in a chart
to hang in our classroom.

Strategies Historians Use to
Analyze
Historical
Documents
Identify the type of document
Identify the author and any relevant information about
the author
Identify the date and historical context
Identify the audience
Identify the purpose for writing
Look for clues in the text that help to identify the author’s
perspectives
 Word choice
 Tone
 Facts and opinions
 Inferences
Connect the text back to the title






Should the colonists
have revolted against
Great Britain?
Don’t forget
your name!
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.
Do you agree with Paine?
Explain why or why not,
using specific text
support from Common
Sense.
Wrap Up Discussion: How much
progress have we made so far in
answering the focus question?
What was the white
male perspective?
What could we as historians do to
gain a better understanding of the
white male perspective?