
"Paul revere and Adams and Hancock's trunk." Topic
10 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the American Revolution Message Board
Areas of Interest18th Century
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile Article The gates of Old Jerusalem offer a wide variety of scenario possibilities.
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
| jowady | 19 Apr 2013 9:43 p.m. PST |
In a post to my earlier request for info on Lexington and Concord I was accused of creating propaganda and that my idea for a diorama with Paul Revere moving a trunk belonging to Sam Adams and John Hancock is incorrect. As I have an MA in History I take statements such as this personally. When I am working on a hypothetical scenario I say so, When I am working on fact it is a different matter. After Revere was captured there was some discussion as to whether or not they should just hang him but instead they confiscated his horse and had him walk back. When he got to Lexington he found that Adams and Hancock were right where he had left them, Hancock talking about joining the militia on the Green. Finally they were convinced of the danger and persuaded to leave, Revere escorting them to what he thought was a safe distance then returned to Lexington. Once there he was informed that they had left behind a trunk containing papers that would have allowed the British to dismantle most of the patriot groups in New England. And lead to the death or imprisonment of a fair number of people. Now for those who think I am making this up I direct you to "Paul Revere's Ride" by David Hackett Fischer, pp 181-183 of the 1994 Hardback edition. |
John the OFM  | 20 Apr 2013 6:48 a.m. PST |
|
| MacSparty | 20 Apr 2013 7:37 a.m. PST |
That is indeed one of my favorite books on the topic as well. Highly recommended. I've also been thinking about the subject a lot the last few days with all that has been happening in Boston, and the coincidence of dates. Last night I couldn't help but wonder when they had that guy cornered in a boat, but in a backyard, is that one light or two? |
John the OFM  | 20 Apr 2013 8:20 a.m. PST |
|
| Militia Pete | 20 Apr 2013 9:30 a.m. PST |
|
| epturner | 20 Apr 2013 8:13 p.m. PST |
Jowady; I don't care what degree you have. It's a propaganda piece. Gavin doesn't mention it. Fleming doesn't mention it. Nelson doesn't mention it. That's three I can think of off the top of my head without walking upstairs to check anything. So your single source says something and you want to model it. Fine. Your table. There's a nice thing here called a Stifle. Feel free to use it. If you're that sensitive, you might want to become familiar with it. Eric |
| Ironwolf | 21 Apr 2013 6:16 p.m. PST |
I can not provide any sources but thats how I had always understood things to have happened that morning. But I always added the part of Adam's taking a pot shot at the british prior to leaving. lol Can't remember where I read it but also recall the story of Hancock sending a note back for his wife to bring the "fish" with her that was going to be made for their dinner. |
| jowady | 21 Apr 2013 7:47 p.m. PST |
EP Turner, David Hackett Fischer is considered one of the leading Historians on the subject today. No one but you has called his work "propaganda". I mentioned my degrees (which are not in the AWI) more to show that I am accustomed to dealing with fact, not wild histrionic accusation. Dr Fischer is a renowned Professor at Brandeis University and has taught at Harvard and Queens College at Oxford, had his book been "propaganda" I am sure that others, including Thomas Fleming, would have criticized it as such. Having heard him speak I would say that he never mentions Dr. Fischer as a propagandist. Now I am sure that you have already stifled me however while you may believe what you chose I will defend myself from those who chose to impugn what I do. I welcome open discussion and do not believe I am always right, but that discussion must involve reasoned thought based upon evidence. |
John the OFM  | 21 Apr 2013 8:07 p.m. PST |
Oh, stop with the self-martyrdom of "I am sure you have stifled me!" and quit acting a suffering saint. You were doing fine up until that. |
| epturner | 22 Apr 2013 9:42 a.m. PST |
Jowady; That's nice. And Galvin says Johnny Smuggles and The Other Obnoxious Adams were long gone, by over an hour before the Crown Forces showed up. As far as him being a good historian, that's true, but then that's the rub. They make mistakes or get confused or make suppositions. Brandeis or no. Anytime you are dealing with a civil war, and this one is no different, you need to look at everything with a hairy eyeball and trust no one, especially not that OFM in the corner
Yes, John, I mean you, damn you eyes and get off MY lawn
Look, mate, if you want to make it as vingette for an Objective Marker or something, rock on. To me, it's like Betsy Ross flags all over the table. And no, I don't stifle. Must have been someone else. Eric |
|