The Boston Massacre was not really a massacre, but more like a riot. In fact only five people died. One of the most common myths is that the BM was the event that led to the Revolutionary War. In fact, many important events led up to the massacre. It was called a massacre by the use of Propaganda. It mainly started by the British trying to enforce laws. British Soldiers were sent to America to enforce the Proclamation and to maintain order but their presence just made matter worse. It all started March 5 by a couple of boys throwing snowballs at British soldiers. A crowd soon gathered throwing ice and making fun of them. Soon after, the British started firing wildly. Other weapons were clubs, knives, swords, and a popular weapon, your own bare hands.
Psychotherapy originated in the late 19th century with the work of Sigmund Freud in Vienna, Austria. Freud developed the theory of psychoanalysis, which laid the foundation for modern psychotherapy techniques.
Back in 1908, a man named William Isaac Thomas wrote "The Psychology of Woman's Dress," American Magazine, 67 (November 1908): 66-72. William Isaac Thomas was an American sociologist born at the end of the US Civil War and died in 1947 after World War II. During this time period, "fashions" evolved just as fast as the frequent changes in society at large. In the same period, but about a decade before Thomas was born, Sigmund Freud was born in 1856. Sigmund Freud was an Austrian neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis. In Freud's world, everything revolved around "psychology", from infant's involuntary micturition (urination) and defecation, children's later control over both body functions, female sexuality (he did not study male sexuality), and adults' dreaming. Freud qualified as a doctor of medicine in 1881 at the University of Vienna, and by 1902 was an affiliated professor there. He had been in "practice" as a psychologist since 1886. So Freud's views of a person's "psychology" was present throughout medicine and everyday thinking.Thomas attributed the "ornamentation" of clothing and dress (both male and female) as sexual displays much like we see in nature. This is an easy metaphor to draw, since both males and females "prance" and try to attract mates.However, much has changed since the days of Freud's late 1800s thinking and philosophies. Much of Freud's work is now viewed as setting women back into the 1700s when all parts of the body needed to be covered. As it was, women up until the early 1900s suffered under dresses down to the ankles with many petticoats worn under them, and sleeves to the wrist with a high neck to protect and conceal the bodice (bosom; breasts). Women went from heavy thick hose in the 1700-1900s, to finally in the 1970s to pantyhose, and today-- freedom from those hot garments.Today, there is no "psychology" to clothing. People wear what is most comfortable for the environment where they live with the exception of some cultures (for example: Islamic countries). When it is HOT, women want to cool their bodies. When it is cold, they want to be warm.However, clothing is still used to make "a statement". Adults now complain about seeing boys and men whose pants hang below their underwear. Women whose shorts are too short or tank tops show too much breast or midriff are viewed negatively. Showing too much skin is still revolting in most societies.Schools and church run schools try to modify how much skin is acceptable, mostly to limit sexual distraction among students, or for student safety.Many societies still blame girls who are raped because of "what they were wearing" or how short or revealing their clothing happened to be. In that respect, Sigmund Freud's biases about women's sexuality still dominates attitudes toward females and sexual behaviors. Men are still "pardoned" for their lust, while women are blamed.But in short, there is NO "psychology" to what women and men wear. "Fashions" will continue to change over decades. What was in fashion in 1970s returned 50-60 years later. What is in fashion now (too tight; too short; hanging below underwear) will hopefully die a quick death and never be seen again!
what is the population of Boston in 1700s
The hope for gems and minerals was most likely the reason that the French and British made alliances with Native Americans in the early 1700s. The French and British hoped to enslave them if needed.
The British government did not have the same interests as the colonists.
The Tea Party in 1773 was when natives of Boston dumped tea into the Boston Harbor to oppose a British measure for direct imports of taxed tea.
The hope for gems and minerals was most likely the reason that the French and British made alliances with Native Americans in the early 1700s. The French and British hoped to enslave them if needed.
The hope for gems and minerals was most likely the reason that the French and British made alliances with Native Americans in the early 1700s. The French and British hoped to enslave them if needed.
in 1750
The hope for gems and minerals was most likely the reason that the French and British made alliances with Native Americans in the early 1700s. The French and British hoped to enslave them if needed.
The increase in British imports during the 1700s ensured that there was a lot of assimilation on the part of the Americans. A lot of the clothing that was common in Britain was transferred to the USA and America also gained from the raw materials that were available only in British colonies.
The hope for gems and minerals was most likely the reason that the French and British made alliances with Native Americans in the early 1700s. The French and British hoped to enslave them if needed.
Yes they did
The King of EnglandThe British sent Hessian forces to fight the American colonists during the Revolutionary War, which took part in the later half of the 1700s. It is estimated that the Hessians made up a quarter of British forces used in America.