This Constitution

Season 2, Episode 4 | The Shot Heard 'Round the World: Understanding Lexington and Concord

• Savannah Eccles Johnston & Matthew Brogdon • Season 2 • Episode 4

Share episode

Why did the American Revolution begin with armed conflict in 1775, more than a year before the Declaration of Independence? What was the significance of Lexington and Concord, and how did these events set the stage for what would become a bitter struggle for independence? In this episode of This Constitution, host Matthew Brogdon is joined by renowned historian Professor Jeremy Black to dive deep into the history of these pivotal moments.

Together, they explore how the conflict in Lexington and Concord was not just about a small skirmish but the spark that ignited the broader American Revolution. They discuss the political, social, and military context, the role of loyalists, and the challenges faced by both the British and colonists as they reluctantly moved toward war.

With historical anecdotes, constitutional analysis, and insightful perspectives on the American struggle for independence, this episode provides a comprehensive understanding of one of the most critical moments in American history.

In This Episode

  • (00:00:00) Introduction to the significance of Lexington and Concord
  • (00:01:24) The context of 1775: Why the Revolution began a year before 1776
  • (00:03:00) The causes of the conflict: The British attempt to seize weapons
  • (00:05:15) Loss of civilian control and the rise of military governance in Boston
  • (00:07:45) The cultural and political divides in the American colonies
  • (00:09:00) The role of loyalists and differing views on rebellion
  • (00:11:10) The Boston Tea Party’s impact and how it shaped colonial resistance
  • (00:13:00) The militarization of the British response post-Boston Tea Party
  • (00:16:20) How the events of 1775 escalated into broader conflict
  • (00:18:30) The significance of bravery at Lexington and Concord
  • (00:21:00) The broader implications of the early American victories
  • (00:23:00) The transition from political resistance to full-blown war
  • (00:25:00) Conclusion: How Lexington and Concord set the stage for the American Revolution

Notable Quotes

[00:01:24]
 "What went wrong was, as we all know, a British attempt to take over an illegal arms dump leads to resistance." – Jeremy Black

[00:18:30]
 "It shows considerable fortitude, and I think fortitude is a key element because some people were clearly, we know from all sorts of an analysis of people that fight, that many of them are frightened, some of them are terrified." – Jeremy Black

[00:21:00]
 "The regulars were also brave men, and we should never forget that." – Jeremy Black

[00:19:00] 

"What I'm gaining from your description of this is that the American Revolution presents us with a kind of tension. We've had an American identity that developed through a kind of self-government that had happened in some colonies in New England for 150 years, since the 1630s." -Matthew Brogdon


Resources and Links

This Constitution  

Jeremy Black 

https://jeremyblackhistorian.wordpress.com/

Matthew Brogdon

[00:00:00] Intro: We the People, do ordain and establish this constitution. 

[00:00:10] Matthew Brogdon: Welcome to this constitution. I'm Matthew Brogdon, and today I'm joined by a very special guest I have with me, Professor Jeremy Black, who's an eminent, prolific historian, speaker, and writer. Welcome to the podcast, Jeremy. 

[00:00:24] Jeremy Black: Thank you. Delighted to be here.

[00:00:26] Matthew Brogdon: Well, I think today we're gonna talk a little bit about Lexington and Concord. It's that time of year right now. It's uh, it's 2025. April 19 is the fateful day for the shot heard round the world. So let's talk about this conflict, this inception of the American Revolution, and I think it'd be good to talk about it by starting by noting it's in 1775, not 1776.

[00:00:51] Matthew Brogdon: So maybe you could help us understand how this conflict gets started. Why are we shooting at the British over a year before the Declaration of Independence? 

[00:00:58] Jeremy Black: Well, that's a great question. [00:01:00] And as you say, most people think about American independence in terms of 1776. The declaration, of course, came more than a year after fighting had started, and that was because nobody actually wanted to start fighting, and also virtually nobody wanted independence at that stage.

[00:01:18] Jeremy Black: What went wrong was as, as we all know, a British attempt to take over an illegal arms dump leads to resistance. Nobody knows precisely who fired the first shot. It, then, of course, there is killing, then killing leads to more, killing many patriots come forward and Harry. The British as they retreat on Boston, the British send out a relief column that leads to more fighting the British, essentially get back to Boston safely, but that has pressed the button on what becomes a major gathering of Patriots in order to besiege Boston at that stage.

[00:01:55] Jeremy Black: This was a surprise to London. This was also a surprise to [00:02:00] most people in the 13 colonies. They knew that there was widespread dissatisfaction with British rule, but they didn't assume that this would necessarily lead to fighting, and if it did lead to fighting, they didn't know what was going to happen.

[00:02:13] Jeremy Black: I. I mean, remember shots had been fired before. Of course, there'd been shots by British troops on the streets of Boston. But I think what one needs to remember is that in 18th century, British world and more generally of that period, there aren't police forces. I mean, you know, the classic idea of the British, of the 19th century as the unarmed police, there aren't police forces.

[00:02:36] Jeremy Black: Instead, policing is done by soldiers. So soldiers are the people who take, you know, play a role in dealing with riots. There is the riot act. The standard thing with the riot act is, let us say, um, I am a justice of the peace. I am another words, a lay figure, not a military figure. I, there's a group of [00:03:00] rioters.

[00:03:00] Jeremy Black: I read the Riot Act, which is literally a act of parliament, which orders them to, uh, disperse. If they disperse, that's it. If they don't disperse, I am supposed to turn to the officer who is with me and say to him along the lines of, sir, do your duty, and he then orders the soldiers to open fire. The key thing being in this context that the military are under civilian control.

[00:03:30] Jeremy Black: Now one of the things of course that goes wrong in New England is that civilian control is eroded prior to Concord and Lexington. In a sense, British uh, administration is militarized in the crisis. That has really followed the Boston Tea Party, and I think it's fair to say that has. Unfortunate consequences.

[00:03:52] Jeremy Black: But nevertheless, even if there hadn't been a militarization of, of, uh, of imperial control there, [00:04:00] the standard account would always have been, yes, you open fire soldiers do that. That's how you deal with rioters. And before everybody goes, oh my God, isn't this awful? It's worth bearing in mind. Look around, um, the United States at the moment, if there was a breakdown of law and order, you know, the police would open 

[00:04:22] Matthew Brogdon: fire on rioters.

[00:04:23] Matthew Brogdon: So help us understand a little bit the, the background of 1775. You mentioned things declining in, in Boston between the Boston Tea Party, which 1773 we just celebrated the 250th anniversary of, of that. Two years ago, between then and Lexington and Concord, which is gonna come along in 1775, we've got a sort of dissent into, you described this as a loss of civilian control.

[00:04:51] Matthew Brogdon: I. And a rise of military rule. Boston. Yeah. What, what 

[00:04:55] Jeremy Black: essentially happens is that, um, the Boston Tea Party is [00:05:00] perceived in London as a violent breach of not just imperial regulations, but also the imperial ethos, if you like. And it leads to the passage through parliament of a series of acts, which extend the authority of the state and limit that in of the authorities in Boston, particularly over the regulation of the harbor.

[00:05:27] Jeremy Black: Which is one which is very much brought under the government and there is also the dispatch of more troops to Boston. The government does not want a repetition of this, but the problem with that is that this makes the atmosphere more febrile. It means that in essence, um, if you are going to get a recurrence of what you might call illegal action, the response is more likely to be forcible.

[00:05:53] Jeremy Black: Hmm. Now it's worth bearing in mind that these acts are passed through Parliament, both houses of Parliament, the [00:06:00] House of Commons, the House of Lords. There is opposition in both houses, particularly in the House of Lords by William Pitt, the elder now Earl of Chatham, who warns. That this could cause trouble.

[00:06:11] Jeremy Black: And other opposition figures say this is not wise. But the government's attitude is that if they don't respond, that there is going to be a, as it were growing anarchy. And the growing anarchy is one that is dangerous and also doesn't reflect their obligation to maintain 

[00:06:32] Matthew Brogdon: the peace. Any indication of what the mood in America is about the, the Boston Tea Party when it occurs?

[00:06:38] Matthew Brogdon: I remember taking my children recently to Boston. We did a bit of a tour and, uh, in, I think it was in FanDuel Hall. They, they have a display right now that goes through, uh, sort of some of the response in America to the Boston Tea Party and suggests that there was some. Some variety of opinion, especially among some of the principal [00:07:00] founders, George Washington, John Adams, uh, Alexander Hamilton I think is generally supportive of it.

[00:07:06] Matthew Brogdon: He was in New York at the time, uh, some of whom looked on this with a bit more of a and a bit more sympathy with the British thinking maybe this was some sort of lawless destruction of property. Yes. So is that, is that an. How are Americans 

[00:07:19] Jeremy Black: responding? Well, Americans, um, as we know, the American War of Independence is also the first major American civil war.

[00:07:26] Jeremy Black: There were many Americans who obviously become loyalists who oppose it, including it's worth saying. Many of the key Episcopalian clerics in Boston itself, many of whom of course, leave Boston in 1776 when the British leave. Again, that's worth bearing in mind. When the British leave Boston in 1776, many loyalists leave with them, but as you correctly say, some of the criticism and opposition of the Tea Party comes from people who would later be leading Patriots, [00:08:00] particularly in Virginia and the South.

[00:08:02] Jeremy Black: There is no real sympathy. I think it's fair to say, and I think that's part of a wider cultural difference. Again, worth bearing in mind that religious differences are very important in the 13 colonies. Episcopalianism is very strong in Virginia and Southwards, and there is a sense that the, among many, that the New Englanders are sectarian.

[00:08:29] Jeremy Black: Mm-hmm. And this is, you know, and, and, and are undesirable. And one of the rowdy 

[00:08:34] Matthew Brogdon: Calvinists. 

[00:08:35] Jeremy Black: Yes. And one of the skills, one of the skills of, um, the founding fathers in 76 in particular. Was to actually be able to join Virginia and New England, it win, which had a very, very, very different ethos. Now, as we know, um, this ethos, these differences of ethos [00:09:00] remain a factor during the war.

[00:09:01] Jeremy Black: They become even more significant thereafter. And if you look at the mapping of support for particular political movements in. The Independent America, they often show very major differences. So, I mean, I'm particularly interested in military history, uh, which is intensely political. If you look at, say, the war of 1812 or the, uh, the war against the Native Americans in Florida, or the Mexican American War, in each case, opposition is quite strong in New England.

[00:09:34] Jeremy Black: These are seen as essentially, you know, southerners Wars or Southerners and Westerners wars in, in the case of the war of 1812, but they are not, uh, they're do, do not have support in the war of the 1812 in which I wrote a book some years ago, is the most abrupt on that because the state militias of New England do not march across the state frontiers to invade Canada [00:10:00] as happened.

[00:10:00] Jeremy Black: Westwards and of course you end up with the Hartford Convention and at least a feeling towards a degree of autonomy. And of course one of the only reasons the British are able to keep being in Canada during the war of 1812 is grain exports. 'Cause Canada doesn't produce much grain, then we're not yet opened up.

[00:10:22] Jeremy Black: The prayer is, who do those grain exports come from? Well, they come from the United States particularly. They are moved north by New England. Um, and of course if you look at the British regulations on Blockade of America in the war of 1812, they're very, very, very gentle as far as New England is concerned.

[00:10:46] Jeremy Black: And I think this needs to be born in mind. Now, this is true of every country. You know, there are divisions in every country. It doesn't lessen American patriotism or nationalism, or the pride that Americans should have in their [00:11:00] country's history to be reminded that America is a mature democracy. People have had differences of opinion over policy, and those differences have often been in of enormous significance, particularly when they have involved killing other Americans.

[00:11:15] Jeremy Black: I mean, you know, uh, most obviously in the second civil war, the big one. That broke out in 1861, and I think it's worth bearing in mind that this element of the first civil war as a civil war with the, the la, the major victims at the end being the loyalists and the Native Americans, I mean, you know, the African Americans didn't benefit, but then they were already unfortunately slaves.

[00:11:42] Jeremy Black: But the loyalists who went, a large number of whom went to Canada, and many of whom then fought in the war of 1812 against. America. They were Americans, but they felt they had been, in their own words, betrayed. And if you [00:12:00] read loyalist literature about the war of 1812, the tragedy in the end is that Britain gives up the struggle.

[00:12:07] Jeremy Black: And of course, some of the loyalists go to America. Some go to the West Indies. I think I'm right in saying, Lord Dunmore, the uh, last Governor of Virginia ends up as governor. I think of The Bahamas, some loyalists settle. In Britain, loyalist slaves who the British had given their freedom to. And you know when they'd fled their masters, they're settled in the new free slave colony of Sierra Leone at Freetown, which is founded in 1791, which is the British equivalent of Liberia.

[00:12:38] Jeremy Black: Precursor of Liberia. And again, that's not how most Americans would see the war of the, you know, the war of Independence as leading to a, a free slave colony on the west coast of Africa. But the war has all sorts of cross channels, just as there are Brits who don't want to fight. On the, as [00:13:00] it were, the British side who think that George II is wrong and they feel that he is embarking and then sustaining a conflict which should be ended.

[00:13:11] Jeremy Black: And what is particularly, uh, ironical is that one of the major figures who feels that and actually persistently tries to resign, is none other than the Prime Minister, the first Lord of the Treasury, Frederick Lord North, who really is very. Wary about the war and wants it to end with a b 

[00:13:30] Matthew Brogdon: settlement. Uh, there was a petition movement.

[00:13:35] Matthew Brogdon: In Britain at the time. Yes. Uh, which drew substantial support, 

[00:13:40] Jeremy Black: right? Yes. The American historian James Bradley wrote an excellent book on this, in which he argued that in 17 75 6, about a sixth of those who were males signed petitions of some form or other. Uh, I mean, obviously remember you've got.

[00:13:56] Jeremy Black: Problems with limited literacy, which many times when people [00:14:00] sign, they can just put a cross on, which is how illiterate people classically sign things. But it is certainly the case that many people didn't want to fight. Of course, this is made easier for the state by the point that there's no conscription.

[00:14:13] Jeremy Black: I'd say you can fight a war in which many people don't want to fight. Well, that's fine 'cause they don't have to fight. No conscription in the Army. I guess. The British Navy did a lot of, well the Navy is a bit different. The Navy has the press gang. And the press gang raises about a third of the sailors.

[00:14:27] Jeremy Black: And that is, as you say, the seizure of people. Uh, largely people from merchant men. To go onto warships because there is no conscription, peacetime, conscription. I think it's fair to say that that involves some of the warships Yes. In American waters. But of course the Navy's principle task in the war is war with the French, which comes from 1778, and that's well within the ambit of, as it were, the British collective memory and collective ID identity.

[00:14:56] Jeremy Black: But you are absolutely right that [00:15:00] men just as many. I mean, it's a civil war in the empire, in a double sense, a civil war within the 13 colonies because there are many loyalists and a civil war within the empire as a whole, which is what a rebellion is. But that civil war I. Is actually seen as a civil war, and it's quite interesting if you look at a lot of the early discussion of what has gone wrong.

[00:15:25] Jeremy Black: Uh, many American patriot commentators present George III as a bad father, a harsh, uh, father who is not willing to listen to his people, his children, the people he should care for, and George III tends to present them as disobedient children. And in a way there is on both parts an element of sorrow.

[00:15:50] Jeremy Black: That's what I think is interesting to note. There isn't the deep and uh, vituperative hatred [00:16:00] that you are going to see in some wards. I mean, for example, there is during the French Revolutionary War. A much strong, just there are some British people who sympathize with the revolutionary French. Let's be clear about this, but there is a much stronger public animus.

[00:16:18] Jeremy Black: Towards the revolution. In the case of the Americans, you have the point that these people are literally cousins. And there had been, and people tend to forget this, uh, not that the, uh, 13 colonies were moving apart. They were getting closer. There was more. Immigration from the British Isles to, um, the, uh, 13 colonies in the 1760s and seventies than there had been in say, the twenties and thirties.

[00:16:45] Jeremy Black: There was more trade, there was more, uh, capital, uh, and also in the words of the Canadian historian Ian Steele. The, uh, Atlantic was shrinking by which he meant there were navigational [00:17:00] improvements and it was becoming quicker and more predictable to sail from London to New York or Boston. It's 

[00:17:07] Matthew Brogdon: like the, uh, the, the 18th century beginnings of globalization 

[00:17:10] Jeremy Black: in a way.

[00:17:10] Jeremy Black: Yes. Well, and also this is specifically important. In the 13th colonists, there is a degree to which in the 17th century, there is more alienation between the 13 colonies. And England as it then was, than there is in the 18th century because in the 17th century, more of the people in the colonies were religious refugees, and there was much British politics, um, due to the English, civil war, glorious revolution, et cetera, was more disruptive.

[00:17:45] Jeremy Black: And therefore, there were more people in the 13 colonies who didn't like what it was happening. In the, by the 1750s, sixties, seventies, there is a more settled American elite, many of whom have traveled to Britain if they [00:18:00] were born in the in America, some of whom have been educated there. They're members of churches that span the Atlantic.

[00:18:08] Jeremy Black: The newspapers take much of their news from British newspapers. The American newspapers and British newspapers, there is a degree to which there is actually a greater closeness. Now that doesn't preclude in other circumstances war. And it didn't preclude it in this case. But you know, the old view was they were move, they were gradually moving apart.

[00:18:29] Jeremy Black: Well, no. They actually weren't, and in some respects, they were gradually moving closer. 

[00:18:36] Matthew Brogdon: This is interesting because, uh, I, you know, I know students when they encounter, when they encounter colonial history in America, it's often useful to observe to them one, the, the long period. Of kind of self-government that's going on in many of the colonies.

[00:18:53] Matthew Brogdon: I think most of the colonies are established, uh, all but one. Georgia is established in the 17th [00:19:00] century in the 16 hundreds. I think Georgia comes along in the 1730s, so that means those colonies had at least a, in most cases, a hundred years or more of political existence before the American Revolution.

[00:19:13] Matthew Brogdon: And not only, as you say, are they commonly founded by. Religious refugees, economic refugees, and so forth, but also are, are quite diverse in other ways. Uh, you know, you have the Dutch founding colonies in New York, and so the idea that we have 13 British colonies on the Atlantic Coast in North America, I.

[00:19:35] Matthew Brogdon: Is really something that has to happen in the 18th century. What I'm gaining from your, your description of this is that the American Revolution presents us with a kind of tension. We've had an American identity that developed through a kind of self-government that had happened in some colonies in New England for 150 years, since the 1630s.

[00:19:56] Matthew Brogdon: And that created a distinctive identity, a kind of [00:20:00] American identity, but that you've actually got a strengthening connection formed by trade, by cultural factors. I'm sure there's a sort of, today we would say a pop culture element to this, but there is a literature and, and what's in the press and what's in popular culture are all sort of reforming.

[00:20:21] Matthew Brogdon: Or strengthening Americans' identity as British citizens. So those two things seem to me like now we hit 1775. Yes. And can I just say, uh, in terms 

[00:20:30] Jeremy Black: of the army, you can see this even more because there was enormous anxiety in the 13 colonies in the early 1750s about French expansion, in particular, French expansion into the Ohio Valley.

[00:20:47] Jeremy Black: And the sense that at that point there was a, a feeling of, you know, exposure. And of course, as you know, in 1754, the initial clashes in the French and Indian War were [00:21:00] not favorable and in what was a pretty key moment, the empire. Which didn't have many troops sent out a significant force, and repeatedly from 1755 repeatedly until New France, Canada was conquered in 1760 and surrendered in 1760.

[00:21:22] Jeremy Black: This was very important and I mean, you know, not only physically did many. Uh, Americans see British troops. I mean, they may have been found them, some of them irritating, but the fact is they were there to help protect them. And they realized that because there'd been an enormous panic in 54 and 55 about the French and Native Americans coming and sculpting them all.

[00:21:42] Jeremy Black: But also Britain from 56 onwards was at war elsewhere. So the fact that the British were sparing these resources because in the previous war, the war of the, of the Austrian succession. I think you call it King George's war. In 1745 after the [00:22:00] British had captured Lewisburg with the assistance, of course, British warships, the Massachusetts militia, an absolute sign of the cooperation of empire.

[00:22:08] Jeremy Black: The British had talked to talk as was wanted, particularly by Miss Massachusetts, that the British would now then send a big expedition to, you know, to conquer, uh, Quebec. And that was planned for in 46. But instead of which, what happened is the British found themselves more and more drawn into a war in the low countries, which was going badly wrong, defeats by the French in 45, 46, 47 in what is now Belgium.

[00:22:37] Jeremy Black: And that. Expedition was abandoned. And in fact, Lewis, because the Peace Treaty with France was a peace treaty in which everybody gave back what they'd conquered, Lewis Beck was returned. So at the time of 48, which was the peace treaty piece of a slash Chappelle, there was a narrative about being betrayed by empire.

[00:22:56] Jeremy Black: Now, that narrative was not only voiced by, uh, American [00:23:00] Patriots, it was voiced by British patriots. The term patriot was actually derived from British political dialogue. To be opponents of the Crown critics of the Crown, I think one would more fairly say now what is different in the, uh, 1750s and early 1760s is instead the British make a major effort, which is why a statue of George II gets put up in, uh, New York.

[00:23:24] Jeremy Black: The British have saved us from these wretched French and from these al all awful Native Americans, and they've cleared out the Acadians from Nova Scotia. You know, you know, they, in other words, they've made a more acceptable anglosphere in which many Americans felt. Highly invested. What therefore, I think causes a lot of a sense of unhappiness in the early seventies is the sense that this has broken down.

[00:23:58] Jeremy Black: Now, the British also [00:24:00] feel it's broken down. They feel that they've taken, taken up an enormous indebtedness, gr, unprecedented expansion of the national debt to pay for the war. They feel that they still have to support the garrisons in the Native American country. They, you know, the people that have been engaged in Pontiac's war, for example, uh, and they feel that they are not being supported by tax revenue it from the 13 colonies.

[00:24:26] Jeremy Black: So both sides feel disappointed. I think it ought, ought to be made clear that you can feel disappointed. It doesn't mean you necessarily have to kill each other. So that is what is. Interesting. It's how you move and unfortunate because it's how you move from being angry to how you move from killing people.

[00:24:44] Jeremy Black: And of course, although all circumstances are different and nothing is analogous, the same thing is worth talking about. When you're thinking of 1861. There was a. Big difference between having views about the desirability or not [00:25:00] of, of slavery, of abolitionism, of state's rights of the national principle, however defined there's a big difference between that and actually killing each other in unprecedented numbers.

[00:25:12] Jeremy Black: So again, and the explanations of the former are not necessarily the explanations of the latter and vice versa. And one of the great problems analytically is that we can run together the two. 

[00:25:24] Matthew Brogdon: So when we roll around to 1775 and, and what we think of as, uh, describe as the shot Hern round the world at at Concord.

[00:25:34] Matthew Brogdon: One way of describing that is that this, this localized conflict, this armed conflict in, in Boston and its surrounding era, is dragging a reluctant people on both sides of the Atlantic into armed conflict. Yes, very much so. So in that sense, Lexington and Concord very much deserves, uh. A kind of, it is a focal point.

[00:25:56] Matthew Brogdon: Well, I think it deserves attention. Is that catalyst? 

[00:25:58] Jeremy Black: Well, the use of [00:26:00] force in a large extent is important. So if you think of 1861, uh, the bombardment of Fort Sumter, a very public premeditated act, is very different to John Brown at Harper's Ferry. And, you know, John Brown at Harper's Ferry is people fighting and it leads in the south to, uh, you know, fear of an abolitionist plot to arm all the slaves.

[00:26:25] Jeremy Black: But that is completely different to what had happened in 1861. Now, of course, as far as southerners were concerned, in 1861, the Lincoln's decision to send troops. You know, southwards itself is a highly aggressive step. So both sides have a sense that they are being put in an impossible position, but what you have certainly got are triggers for war, which are not the same thing necessarily as the long-term causes of war.

[00:26:54] Matthew Brogdon: So, to to conclude this discussion, maybe you could help us understand, is, is Lexington and Concord [00:27:00] a a victory for the colonists? I know Americans think of it as. There's a real, as a, uh, uh, you know, the, the David. Taking on Goliath and Americans pulling off this remarkable feat, is that a, is that a good way to think about the conflict?

[00:27:18] Matthew Brogdon: In what sense did the Americans win at Lexington and Concord? 

[00:27:21] Jeremy Black: Well, I think it requires considerable bravery to stand in a line against regulars who can open fire on you. We don't know who's o fired the first shot, so it will leave that as an open question, but it shows considerable fortitude, and I think fortitude is a key element because some people were clearly, we know from all sorts of an analysis of people that fight, that many of them are frightened, some of them are terrified.

[00:27:50] Jeremy Black: But whether you are frightened or terrified, you still have to show fortitude. You still have to be prepared to hold your weapon in position. You have to be prepared to do the job. Now that showed considerable bravery in that context, and I, I think it's worth saying that, you know, the regulars were also brave men.

[00:28:16] Jeremy Black: I mean, let's be clear about these. These are not sort of ter from some sort of Star Wars film as they're sometimes depicted in the in American public mythos. Certainly the 75. To 76 campaign, both that around Boston and more generally, the political developments and use of force in order to intimidate loyalists on the East Coast are tremendous successes, as is the initial advance north into Canada, the capture of the forts on the Lake Champlain axis, and then the seizure of Montreal and the siege of Quebec.

[00:28:56] Jeremy Black: So there's a whole host of [00:29:00] achievements at that point. Unfortunately, for the Patriots, their successes in 75, which include the fortitude they'd shown at Bunker Hill, yes. They were eventually driven. Out at Bunker Hill. But quite frankly, the, the British casualty rate that day was such that they couldn't afford many such victories.

[00:29:19] Jeremy Black: It was a PY victory, but the American successes at 75 do not prepare them adequately for what is to happen in 76 when the war gets far worse. Beginning with the failure at the attack on Quebec on New Year's Eve. 75 

[00:29:37] Matthew Brogdon: to 76, as it were. Well, thank you for helping us understand where the conflict came from and how this memorable.

[00:29:45] Matthew Brogdon: Encounter a Lexington and Concord form a catalyst for the beginning of the American Revolution. Thanks for joining us, Jerry, and thank you for inviting me to Utah Valley. The Constitution is more than parchment under glass at the National [00:30:00] Archives. It's a blueprint for American self-government that shapes every part of our civic life from the rights we cherish to the laws.

[00:30:07] Matthew Brogdon: We live under. We explore the ongoing battle over the meaning and relevance of America's founding document. This Constitution will equip you to engage the most pressing political questions of our time. Join us every two weeks as we hash out constitutional questions together. This podcast is ordained and established by the Center for Constitutional Studies at Utah Valley University, the home of Utah's Civic Thought & Leadership Initiative.