Tar, Feathers, and the Enemies of American Liberties, 1768-1776
1. The article is a chronological account of the origins of tarring
and feathering and its significance during the 1700s in the New England
colonies. The author illustrates how the shocking act became commonplace
and how it evolved from rowdy sailors tarring and feathering unwanted
stowaways to quaint young women tarring and feathering young men they
deemed rude. The author uses historical accounts to convey this
argument.
2. The author, Benjamin H. Irvin is a historian
speaking about events that happened 400 years ago. The author wrote the
article in in a third person omniscient point of view, knowing exactly
what happened and when it happened. The author’s purpose in writing the
article was to educate the reader of the significance of tarring and
feathering in the New England colonies during the 1700’s. Because it is a
historical account, and there is no way of communicating with people
that lived 400 years ago, we are missing the voice of the people that
lived during that time who were subjected to the act or engaged in
committing the act, and how they might have felt about tarring and
feathering.
3. In class we talked about how such a gruesome act became so
commonplace. We discussed how the people of that time used tarring and
feathering as an intimidation tactic to scare others from straying away
from public opinion. With what we learned in class, I was able to
conclude how tarring and feathering was used to silence opposing views
with intimidation rather than violence. Although the act of tarring and
feathering someone is violent, it was a much more pleasant than
hangings, and the burning of “witches”.
4. In class we discussed the how the people used tarring feathering
to combat the British, by scaring away British tax collectors and how
they used tarring and feathering to scare off loyalists and enemies of
the revolution. We also discussed how tarring and feathering became a
way for people to punish other people with differing opinions, and those
that didn't fit into society. We also talked about how women took an
active role in tarring and feathering.
5. What I was left curious about was why people were able to take law
into their own hands and offer such harsh and deadly punishment without
any intervention from the real law. I was also left wondering how
people were treated by the rest of society after they were tarred and
feathered. Were they now treated as lesser by the rest of society? Was
there any opposition to the act from those who sympathized with those
that were punished? Was there always justice, or were some people
wrongly punished for crimes they didn't commit?
