A public reading of the Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776

-
Mattax

Mattax

Just the facts, ma'am
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
17,796
Reaction score
14,791
Location
Phila. Pa
Was the Declaration of Independence read on July 4 1776?

The answer would seem to be yes.
In this article Chris Coelho lays out the case which can be summarized as:
1. There's pretty good evidence the hand written copy brought to the printer on July 4th had diacratic marks on it to aid in a public reading.
2. Several people at the time made note of a public reading in their diaries or letters.
3. A few others who were in the vicinity (including one who practically lived next door to the State house) in later life wrote that they heard it.

Who heard it? Mostly the people who happened to be in or near there (the State House yard) and perhaps some of the Timothy Matlack's associates whom he might have sent word to.

Who was Timothy Matlack? At the time he was a clerk and top penman for Charles Thomson, the Continental Congress's Secretary. Both were considered 'radical.' Radical was used to describe all those who had been advocating for independence as opposed to the men of 'moderation' who wanted to move in that direction only if it became neccessary. In Matlack's case, 'radical' also meant an advocate for a much more democratic distribution of power in Pennsylvania.
The First Public Reading of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776 - Journal of the American Revolution

In the article 'Associators' refers to Pennsylvania's form of militia - voluntary because the colony's pacifist history. However, they were mostly equiped and paid etc by the assembly, and eventually served under terms of the articles of war which they negotiated.
 
Last edited:
God bless the USA.
It is too bad we've been the Divided.S.A though.
 
Last edited:
Not to change the subject, but a real good movie to watch over the 4th is that Mel Gibson movie, about the Revolutionary War, I forget the name.
 
FB_IMG_16254124349031123.jpg
 
barbee6043 said:
Not to change the subject, but a real good movie to watch over the 4th is that Mel Gibson movie, about the Revolutionary War, I forget the name.
Click to expand...
Glad you enjoyed it.
Just keep in mind its pretty much entirely fictional.
That's pretty much the norm for all movies set in 18th and even 19th century.
Surprising the musical 1776 had as much historical basis as one could hope for from a play/movie.
 
Mattax said:
Glad you enjoyed it.
Just keep in mind its pretty much entirely fictional.
That's pretty much the norm for all movies set in 18th and even 19th century.
Surprising the musical 1776 had as much historical basis as one could hope for from a play/movie.
Click to expand...
I understand it is a movie and Hollywood, but I also see a lot of history taught that I know is not true too !!
 
Mattax said:
Glad you enjoyed it.
Just keep in mind its pretty much entirely fictional.
That's pretty much the norm for all movies set in 18th and even 19th century.
Surprising the musical 1776 had as much historical basis as one could hope for from a play/movie.
Click to expand...
For the American Revolution there isn't a single film that I can think of that is particularly good as far as history goes.
Drums Along the Mohawk is one of the better ones - based loosely on the events at and around Ft Stanwix in 1777.

In terms of books, there's a pretty good selection of pretty readable non-fiction.
There's a few ways to look at historical 'truth', but we too often see is a confusion between what is fact and what is narrative.
History is making a narrative based on evidence or tradition.
The challenge for us today in the US is encouraging people to make connections that they can relate to, without distorting the facts or dismissing how others make that connection.
When we see or hear people say a new narrative is the only true history, that is a zero sum game. It is no better than those that said the old narrative was the only true history.
Both are wrong. The only 'true history' is the evidence. As the body of evidence grows, we learn new things and sometimes the stories change and more often they just get richer and grow different dimensions.
 
Last edited:
OK.
For all of you who curse those who serve the US Government.
I spent a good part of my life working for the National Park Service.
Each of the government agencies and departments is there to carry out a job that we had our Congress and President sign into law.
Many of these go back before we were born. That doesn't matter. It's our country. Most of us accept it is the best and leading example of a free republic that has ever existed. We do not always agree, but we stick with it even when we don't win the arguement or the vote. If we can't do that we cease to be a democracy.

Maybe you don't see a need for National Parks, or the Bureau of Indian Affairs (and boy have they surely made a mess of things multiple times). Or maybe you don't see a need for federally funded roads, or maybe even a standing professional army. Well I'm sorry. That's all a part of our history. You can seek to change it, but it will take time. But our US government is US, doing what we asked it. In the meantime realize that most of those people are doing their best to provide whatever public service they have signed up to do. Of course there are bad eggs and bozo managers in the mix. That's a problem with every organization. For example I honor and respect all of those who served in the Vietnam war even though some (including some of the top leaders) could be put in the category of bad eggs and bozos for being ignorant, ineffective, and purposely misleading.

This tension goes right back to the American Revolution. Keeping the Continental Army (and Navy) in the field took lots of people and cost lots of money. As the war progress Congress wanted to know where the money was all being spent and was it really neccessary. Their attempts at clamping down often choked the army's capability, and other times missed the mark, but their concern was legit. One of George Washington's greatest skills was getting Congress and the State governments to understand the needs and keep the army in the field until the last major British forces left NYC in 1783.
 
Last edited:
Mattax said:
Glad you enjoyed it.
Just keep in mind its pretty much entirely fictional.
That's pretty much the norm for all movies set in 18th and even 19th century.
Surprising the musical 1776 had as much historical basis as one could hope for from a play/movie.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure mel Gibson movies are as historically true as possible, he is very diligent in his history. Any dealing with history that is.
 
If you're interested in the war in the south, I recommend Pancake's
This Destructive War: The British Campaign in the Carolinas, 1780-1782
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top