Evaluating Conflicting Accounts of the Boston Massacre
During a methods seminar, a teacher presents two excerpts about the Boston Massacre of March 5, 1770. Excerpt A, from the Boston Gazette (March 12, 1770), calls the event 'a horrid massacre' in which 'merciless soldiers' fired on unarmed citizens after a 'trifling quarrel.' Excerpt B, from a letter by Captain Thomas Preston written in March 1770, claims the soldiers acted in self-defense after a 'mob' attacked them with clubs and snowballs; Preston says he ordered his men not to fire. Both accounts appeared within a week of the event. The Gazette's audience was Patriot merchants, while Preston's letter was intended for British officials. The teacher asks students to judge which account is more reliable for understanding what happened. The packet contains no other sources.
1. Which account is more reliable for understanding 'what happened' on March 5, 1770? Explain using sourcing principles.
Read the worked answer
Neither account is fully reliable for 'what happened' because both are purpose-driven. The Gazette is a Patriot newspaper writing for merchants; its language ('horrid massacre,' 'merciless soldiers') signals political framing. Preston's letter is a first-person account by a participant, but it was written for British officials and is self-serving; he denies ordering fire. Reliability depends on the question: for Patriot rhetoric, the Gazette is valuable; for the soldiers' perspective, Preston is valuable. For factual reconstruction, each must be corroborated. A historian should not simply choose one; instead, compare claims and look for independent evidence. If forced, Preston's letter has eyewitness proximity, but its purpose and audience make it suspect. The Gazette is secondhand and ideological. The best answer is that neither is sufficient alone.
2. How would you use both accounts to construct a more complete narrative?
Read the worked answer
Use the Gazette to establish how Patriots interpreted the event, including grievances about standing armies and 'unarmed citizens.' Use Preston to reconstruct the soldiers' account: a crowd, clubs, snowballs, and a disputed order to fire. Compare points of agreement (a crowd gathered, shots were fired, deaths occurred) and disagreement (who attacked first, whether Preston ordered fire). Construct a narrative that presents the event as contested, noting that both accounts agree on the sequence of a confrontation but differ on responsibility. This teaches students that primary sources are not neutral windows but arguments.
3. What additional evidence would you seek to resolve contradictions?
Read the worked answer
Seek trial transcripts from Rex v. Wemms (1770), depositions, coroner's reports, and accounts from other soldiers and bystanders. Physical evidence (wounds, snow depth) and town records could help. Neutral observers, such as merchants not aligned with either side, might provide balance. The historian should also look for later recollections, though these are less reliable. The goal is corroboration across independent sources, not choosing the most vivid account.