I was just looking forward to your next upload, and lo and behold, it appears! In all of your videos, I feel like I gain a more intimate knowledge of these major events that often get glossed over in a more general look at the period. I appreciate the granular approach you take and your matter-of-fact oration style. Thank you Jeffrey!
Thank you! When there is a lag between videos, it's because the one I am working on got more detailed than anticipated (and led me down a rabbit hole I hadn't foreseen). I spent a whole weekend researching whether the stamps were waxed, printed, glued, etc. They were embossed, which makes sense, because it's the hardest to counterfeit. I like those details.
@@JeffreytheLibrarian There were lots of "Liberty Essays" written at the time that you should look into, I plan on making a video about 20 or so of them and the one I am reading now is call Considerations of Imposing Taxes by Daniel Dulany, a Loyalist who argued for direct representation for the colonists in Parliament.
@@JeffreytheLibrarianThat is true. Classical Latin uses a w sound while vulgate or ecclesiastical Latin uses a v sound. The term "vulgate" Latin apparently comes from the term "vulgar" or "slang"
Thanks! I'd love to see coverage on some of the other mercantilist policies imposed on the colonies. Like only allowed to buy "finished goods" from UK, only allowed to sell raw materials to UK. Not even allowed to have sterling coins - which is why the Spanish dollar/silver/piece-of-eight is used so much, and even paper money tried. I think a big part of the discontent with "virtual" representation, is that the UK based reps did not have to live with these colonial legal restrictions.
Sorry I didn't get to this until today, but again you've made a wonderful film. I love learning the little details about our history. I had no idea that William Pitt actually sided with the colonies or that we had some allies in Parliament. I had no idea how crippling the tax was. No wonder we tried every excuse not to pay it.
👍Usual impeccable treatment. Qns: How much of the Stamp Act revenue was to be used to pay for the British forces in America and how much to pay off the British national debt? And were the British forces in what was to become Canada included in the payment structure? BTW: Stamp Tax (known as Stamp Duty) is still due in the UK if you buy/sell property and shares/securities.
Thank you for the great questions. My understanding is the Stamp Act was meant to finance the ongoing defense of North America. The funds were to be used to pay the redcoats. I also understand Canada to be included in this, however, there does not seem to be the kind of resistance to taxation in the Canadian colonies, and this may be due to the fact that the population was lower, or that French Canadians were worried about other issues, or that Britain was actually making serious efforts at this time to accommodate the French Canadians and native allies there. I'd have to look at how far west Britain was posting redcoats at this time. Fort Pitt and Fort Detroit are pretty far west at this time. Pontiac's Rebellion had cleared out some of the far postings in the Ohio and Great Lakes country, and I think His Majesty was focused on consolidating the new gains in Quebec and Florida rather than causing any more issues further on the frontier. I like to tell folks that we have a stamp act in the USA for mailing envelopes. Placing a stamp on an envelope to pay the postal service is essentially the stamp act for mail, just nobody thinks of it like that.
That is an interesting question. I would need to do some research on that. After the French and Indian War, Britain was suddenly a world power, with colonies all over the globe. It was a sudden change, and their parliamentary system was centuries old, so my hunch is those kinds of changes would require more time. The US Constitution does a good job of rapidly incorporating new territories as states with representatives, so I guess the lesson was learned.
@@JeffreytheLibrarian The North American colonies were unique, in that they were stand-alone colonies, as it were, as opposed to either merchant houses dealing with and through the native power structure, or settlers exercising military control over native populations. I suppose they may never have even considered it.
I believe that they offered representation and set aside several seats. But the colonial governments declined to take the seats, mainly the colonies were a small part of the empire and the representation would be minimal.
How did the Canadian colonies react? I really don't think that this discriminatory act would fly today. Even this current Supreme Court would outlaw it.
The Canadian colonies remained firmly loyal to the Crown during the Revolution. Florida also did not participate in the Revolution, and it went back to Spain after the conflict.
And to this day wealthy Americans love having an expensive army to protect their liberties, but prefer others to pay for it. It is interesting the costs of the Seven Years' War cost Britain its major colony, and ultimately destroyed the French monarchy. Wars are very expensive whether you win or lose.
I was just looking forward to your next upload, and lo and behold, it appears!
In all of your videos, I feel like I gain a more intimate knowledge of these major events that often get glossed over in a more general look at the period.
I appreciate the granular approach you take and your matter-of-fact oration style.
Thank you Jeffrey!
Thank you! When there is a lag between videos, it's because the one I am working on got more detailed than anticipated (and led me down a rabbit hole I hadn't foreseen). I spent a whole weekend researching whether the stamps were waxed, printed, glued, etc. They were embossed, which makes sense, because it's the hardest to counterfeit. I like those details.
Which is why we love these videos. Your attention to detail is appreciated and meaningful.
Another good one Jeffrey! Thank you.
Thank you!
Good information. It got me to look up Death without the benefit of clergy. Interesting piece of history I was previously unaware of.
Parliament was not messing around with these penalties. They didn't foresee the united opposition they would encounter, though.
Great content as always! Keep it up!
Thank you!
@@JeffreytheLibrarian There were lots of "Liberty Essays" written at the time that you should look into, I plan on making a video about 20 or so of them and the one I am reading now is call Considerations of Imposing Taxes by Daniel Dulany, a Loyalist who argued for direct representation for the colonists in Parliament.
Another clear, straightforward and entirely comprehensible video. Next, please.
Thank you!
Jeffrey is the best. Always look forward to any videos
Thank you!
Excellent video on this important harbinger of the American Revolution.
Thank you!
No Taxation without Direct Representation! No virtual representation allowed!
DC license plates lol
Love your depth and detail. Thank you!
Thank you!
Great video! Thanks for the history lesson.
Thank you!
Such an informational video. Maybe a few less stock clips do the trick. But I really enjoyed the research done. Keep up the great work!
Thank you!
Good info and well presented! Just a quick note. I believe it's pronounced vellum with a hard V. Thanks for these great American history videos.
I was pronouncing it the way my high school Latin teacher would want. In Latin, the "v" is pronounced like a "w."
@@JeffreytheLibrarianThat is true. Classical Latin uses a w sound while vulgate or ecclesiastical Latin uses a v sound. The term "vulgate" Latin apparently comes from the term "vulgar" or "slang"
Thanks! I'd love to see coverage on some of the other mercantilist policies imposed on the colonies. Like only allowed to buy "finished goods" from UK, only allowed to sell raw materials to UK. Not even allowed to have sterling coins - which is why the Spanish dollar/silver/piece-of-eight is used so much, and even paper money tried. I think a big part of the discontent with "virtual" representation, is that the UK based reps did not have to live with these colonial legal restrictions.
Sorry I didn't get to this until today, but again you've made a wonderful film. I love learning the little details about our history. I had no idea that William Pitt actually sided with the colonies or that we had some allies in Parliament. I had no idea how crippling the tax was. No wonder we tried every excuse not to pay it.
Thank you! I really like the details as well. Details make it real.
The picture becomes clearer for me.
Thanks for watching!
👍Usual impeccable treatment. Qns: How much of the Stamp Act revenue was to be used to pay for the British forces in America and how much to pay off the British national debt? And were the British forces in what was to become Canada included in the payment structure? BTW: Stamp Tax (known as Stamp Duty) is still due in the UK if you buy/sell property and shares/securities.
Thank you for the great questions. My understanding is the Stamp Act was meant to finance the ongoing defense of North America. The funds were to be used to pay the redcoats. I also understand Canada to be included in this, however, there does not seem to be the kind of resistance to taxation in the Canadian colonies, and this may be due to the fact that the population was lower, or that French Canadians were worried about other issues, or that Britain was actually making serious efforts at this time to accommodate the French Canadians and native allies there. I'd have to look at how far west Britain was posting redcoats at this time. Fort Pitt and Fort Detroit are pretty far west at this time. Pontiac's Rebellion had cleared out some of the far postings in the Ohio and Great Lakes country, and I think His Majesty was focused on consolidating the new gains in Quebec and Florida rather than causing any more issues further on the frontier. I like to tell folks that we have a stamp act in the USA for mailing envelopes. Placing a stamp on an envelope to pay the postal service is essentially the stamp act for mail, just nobody thinks of it like that.
Did no one in Parliment think of extending representation to the colonies? Say, two members from each colony or plantation?
That is an interesting question. I would need to do some research on that. After the French and Indian War, Britain was suddenly a world power, with colonies all over the globe. It was a sudden change, and their parliamentary system was centuries old, so my hunch is those kinds of changes would require more time. The US Constitution does a good job of rapidly incorporating new territories as states with representatives, so I guess the lesson was learned.
@@JeffreytheLibrarian The North American colonies were unique, in that they were stand-alone colonies, as it were, as opposed to either merchant houses dealing with and through the native power structure, or settlers exercising military control over native populations. I suppose they may never have even considered it.
I believe that they offered representation and set aside several seats. But the colonial governments declined to take the seats, mainly the colonies were a small part of the empire and the representation would be minimal.
@@vincent412l7 Thank you.
How did the Canadian colonies react? I really don't think that this discriminatory act would fly today. Even this current Supreme Court would outlaw it.
The Canadian colonies remained firmly loyal to the Crown during the Revolution. Florida also did not participate in the Revolution, and it went back to Spain after the conflict.
And to this day wealthy Americans love having an expensive army to protect their liberties, but prefer others to pay for it.
It is interesting the costs of the Seven Years' War cost Britain its major colony, and ultimately destroyed the French monarchy.
Wars are very expensive whether you win or lose.
Although losing almost always costs more. 🤣🤣🤣
42!