FACT WATCH: Sarah Palin's Twist on Paul Revere

By FactCheck.Org

Much-ridiculed former governor altered history -- but isn't entirely wrong

Sarah Palin's much-ridiculed story of Paul Revere isn't entirely wrong, but it's badly twisted. Revere didn't ring bells or fire shots, and he was riding to warn two fellow rebels that the British were coming to arrest them -- not to warn the British "that they weren't going to be taking away our arms."

That's what the former Alaska governor said in an offhand remark caught by a TV camera at a June 2 stop in Boston:

[Revere] warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms, by ringing those bells and making sure as he was riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.

Palin's mangled history was quickly dismissed by news reporters and comedians. But then Palin said on June 5 on Fox News Sunday that she "didn't mess up" the Paul Revere story, and that "I know my American history."

Here's how that exchange went:

Fox's Chris Wallace: You realized that you messed up about Paul Revere, don't you?

Palin: You know what? I didn't mess up about Paul Revere. Here is what Paul Revere did. He warned the Americans that the British were coming, the British were coming, and they were going to try take our arms and we got to make sure that we were protecting ourselves and shoring up all of ammunitions and our firearms so that they couldn't take it. But remember that the British had already been there, many soldiers for seven years in that area. And part of Paul Revere's ride -- and it wasn't just one ride -- he was a courier, he was a messenger. Part of his ride was to warn the British that we're already there. That, hey, you're not going to succeed. You're not going to take American arms. You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual, private militia that we have. He did warn the British. And in a shout-out, gotcha type of question that was asked of me, I answered candidly. And I know my American history.

So how does Palin's version compare with, say, Paul Revere's? Not very well.

Revere, in the most complete account he gave of his famous ride, a letter written about 1798, stated that he rode to warn fellow rebels Samuel Adams and John Hancock that the British were coming to arrest them. This transcription, Revere's spelling mistakes and all, is posted on the website of the Massachusetts Historical Society:

On Tuesday evening, the 18th, it was observed, that a number of Soldiers were marching towards the bottom of the Common. About 10 o'Clock, Dr. Warren Sent in great haste for me, and beged that I would imediately Set off for Lexington, where Messrs. Hancock & Adams were, and acquaint them of the Movement, and that it was thought they were the objets.

Revere didn't mention firing any shots or ringing any bells, and neither does the account given by the Paul Revere House in its brief history, "The Real Story of Paul Revere's Ride." "On the way to Lexington," states the brief history, "Revere 'alarmed' the country-side, stopping at each house, and arrived in Lexington about midnight. As he approached the house where Adams and Hancock were staying, a sentry asked that he not make so much noise. 'Noise!' cried Revere, 'You'll have noise enough before long. The regulars are coming out!'

It's true that shots were fired and bells were rung, but not by Revere.

According to David Hackett Fischer's 1995 book Paul Revere's Ride, Revere rode to the house of Captain Isaac Hall, commander of Medford's minutemen, and it was Hall who triggered the town's alarm system. Fischer added (on page 140): "A townsman remembered that 'repeated gunshots, the beating of drums and the ringing of bells filled the air.' "

In Palin's defense: It's true that American rebels had stored arms and gunpowder at Concord , and that British Gen. Thomas Gage not only had orders to arrest the leaders, but had decided to seize and destroy those arms. Alerted by Revere, American militia members confronted the British at the battles of Lexington and Concord, the first armed encounters of the Revolutionary War.

It's also true that Revere spoke to British officers -- though that was by no means his intent. He was seized by a British patrol before he got to Concord. Revere, under questioning, told British officers that 500 Americans were coming to confront them. As he recollected in 1798:

[An officer] asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.

Another officer "[c]lapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out," Revere recalled.

He was still in British custody when the first shots were fired at Lexington, "which appeared to alarm them very much," Revere said. The British later released Revere, after taking the horse he had been riding.

But Revere makes no mention of specifically "warning" the British against trying to seize arms. In fact, the Americans moved most of the arms before Gen. Gage's troops could find them.

 

Follow The Center for Public Integrity on Twitter: www.twitter.com/iwatch

Comments

[TAMPA M]

05:49 AM on 06/14/2011

She probably got a quick history lesson from Prof. Glenn Beck

[NoSacredCow]

06:06 PM on 06/10/2011

Gee she didn't go to school in Texas did she?

[NeedleJig]

10:27 PM on 06/09/2011

Did't she just visited Freedom Trail and the other historic sites around the area before she volunteered this answer? She was just there at the historic sites learning about the Midnight Ride. She said she is on a Tour visiting historic sites across America learning about American History. She gave a statement fresh from learning about it and she earned an "F"

[grnmtnkate]

07:56 PM on 06/09/2011

I certainly don't mind when people make a mistake and think they know something when they don't, just admit it. That may be why when I am not quite positive I will preface it with, I am pretty sure this is blah blah blah. What makes this woman insufferable is that she speaks with the surety of God. Even when she is shown she is wrong she still says she did not make a mistake and that she knows her U.S. History. Maybe it is because I grew up in New England, but I learned about Paul Revere's ride and never heard her version. I guess it shows you can't just look at the pictures.

[WashingTime]

10:34 AM on 06/10/2011

Just like the current President. He believes everything that he says on a daily basis, kind of like the economy is going in the right direction and the Stimulus needs to be passed right now so that the unemployment rate won't go over 8%. From the "ditch" to the gutter/sewer. It's easy to keep spending someone else's money, keep up the good work.

[tj101]

10:59 AM on 06/10/2011

Not even close. But thanks for playing.

[Realdemocracyplease]

01:06 PM on 06/11/2011

So your comment on an article about how Sarah Palin was wrong about history is about Obama?

[mangrovemama2002]

06:28 PM on 06/09/2011

Why is the Center for Public Integrity focusing on Sarah Palin's knowledge of Revolutionary War history?

Where is the public integrity issue involved?

[cgert88888]

06:04 PM on 06/09/2011

I guess it depends upon where you went to school, what texts were used, and how they were illustrated. Although I have read many accounts of Paul Revere's ride and taken a guided walking tour of the route through Boston, etc. I clearly remember an early school text in which Revere was depicted doing pretty much what Sarah Palin said. It included an illustration of Revere riding through town RINGING A BELL with his right hand. The illustration may well have been more symbolic than factual but it is still impinted on my mind. I have no issues with calling out politicians when they mis-speak; just treat all of the the same. The media totally glossed over Obama's 57 state comment but can't seem to let go of Palin's Revere remark. I'm willing to bet a pint of Samuel Adams' Boston Lager that only about 1% of the people trashing palin on this had any idea what Revere's actual mission was that night, nor any specific details of his detainment, etc. Get a life!

[qqader]

06:50 PM on 06/09/2011

What percentage of the 99% of the people that are trashing Mrs. Palin, who along with her, also may not have any specific idea of the details of Revere's mission that night, are touring the country in a bus and possibly toying with the idea of becoming the next president of the United States? I know that in our country, anyone (natural born citizens of course) can become president, but including Mrs. Palin among them may be applying that aphorism too broadly.

[DHarvey44]

01:53 PM on 06/10/2011

~I'm willing to bet a pint of Samuel Adams' Boston Lager that only about 1% of the people trashing palin on this had any idea what Revere's actual mission was that night, nor any specific details of his detainment­, etc~
I'm willing to bet 2 pints of Samual Adams' Boston Lager that not even .000001% of the people trashing Palin have ever ran for Vice President of the United States of America, nor have they been a possible Presidential Candidate. It amazes me the she is coming in second in the race for the Republican Nominee when she hasn't even said she is running.
She, as well as the media, are doing this country a great disjustice by making her headline news. Search Youtube and google for the words "Sarah Palin" combined with any of the following to see why she really should be unimportant and benine to American politics. "Sarah Palin" + (Roe Vs Wade, Abortion, Foreign Policy, Evolution, Bush Doctrine, Katie Couric, Palistine and the Jews, Health Care, Founding Fathers, Supreme Court, Bail outs....) Hell, why not just google Sarah Palin + any current event, historical event, political talking point, political agenda, or anything that might be relevant to someone who may want to hold an extremely important position such as vice president or even president of the United States of America.

[qqader]

05:57 PM on 06/09/2011

The thing that confuses me about Governor Palin's supporters is the alacrity with which they support her even when faced with how inarticulate she is and often very poorly informed of issues for a person of her national political stature. Her supporters should ask themselves this question, "How strongy would I support Sarah Palin if she were my child's teacher at school?"

[mebdonenow]

05:35 PM on 06/09/2011

well, all these years i've known about paul reveres ride and its been wrong. thank you sarah for setting american history straight. don't know what we would do without you.

[tj101]

04:53 PM on 06/09/2011

Ultra C
1 Fans
Become a fan
Follow
3 hours ago (2:06 PM)
Hmmm . . . interestin­g. Are you saying that Revere neither rang bells nor did he cause bells to be rung? Because, the NPR interview contradict­s you there.
------

When did palin say he "caused bells to be rung". Is this the new tactic? So, Revere's "causing" bells to be rung", now means he rung them himself?

Looks like palin fans need to change palin's own words, now, to fit the truth....

[Quinxy von Besiex]

04:47 PM on 06/09/2011

With Sarah Palin reading "all of them" newspapers and magazines I'd think she'd have a better grasp of the facts.

[grnmtnkate]

07:57 PM on 06/09/2011

LMAO!!!

[cantdog41]

04:37 PM on 06/09/2011

she would be better off not to open her mouth so much,she has an act of putting her foot in her mouth at every turn,this would surely qualify her as a presidential candidate

[anne1stoftwo]

02:07 PM on 06/09/2011

Is anyone surprised that Palin has her own spin on American History. Even fourth graders are aware of Paul Revere's ride and what he did. To bad that is a class she slept through. Oddly enough, she is talking about arms like the 2nd amendment was already written. Terribly odd when you think of it to be honest. Poor Sarah!

[zoemax]

02:06 PM on 06/09/2011

This would be a fun watch:
Put all the candidates on Jeopardy! .. and have all the answers relate to history & government.

Lets see how smart they all are.

[Chimoch]

11:35 AM on 06/09/2011

For a journalism major she is questionable thinned skinned.

[Ultra C]

10:57 AM on 06/09/2011

I thought that NPR's "All Things Considered" made it quite clear that Sarah Palin was correct, see transcript at: http://www.npr.org/2011/06/06/137011636/how-accurate-were-palins-comments-on-paul-revere,

"Prof. ALLISON: Yeah. She was making a Second Amendment case. But in fact, the British were going out to Concord to seize colonists' arms, the weapons that the Massachusetts Provincial Congress was stockpiling there.

So, yeah, she is right in that. I mean, she may be pushing it too far to say this is a Second Amendment case. Of course, neither the Second Amendment nor the Constitution was in anyone's mind at the time. But the British objective was to get the arms that were stockpiled in Concord."

The interviewee was Professor Robert Allison is chair of the history department at Suffolk University in Boston. I love how he ended it:

Prof. ALLISON: I haven't talked to many - well, I don't know. I mean, I haven't talked to too many historians today. And you know, Sarah Palin is a lightning rod. I just was thinking about how many times, you know, I've spoken about Paul Revere. I've organized events about the American Revolution. No one ever pays any attention. Suddenly, Sarah Palin comes to town, makes an off-the-cuff remark about what she learned, and suddenly, you're calling me to find out what I think about Paul Revere and the American Revolution

[anne1stoftwo]

02:11 PM on 06/09/2011

If you read Paul Revere's papers he states he was going house to house to warn the people but his mission was to warn Hancock and Adams about their arrest if they were caught. She is wrong! She inflats what happened and twisted it to mean we were already fighting for arms. We were not.

[Ultra C]

03:19 PM on 06/09/2011

What I was hoping for was "She is wrong! Here, let me explain HOW she is wrong:"

[tj101]

03:22 PM on 06/09/2011

From the same article:

Prof. ALLISON: Well, he's not firing warning shots.

So she got that wrong.

"she may be pushing it too far to say this is a Second Amendment case. Of course, neither the Second Amendment nor the Constitution was in anyone's mind at the time."

So, she got that wrong, too.

----

Pick and choose all you want, but this was the over all message:

Prof. ALLISON:. And remember, she is a politician. She's not an historian. And God help us when historians start acting like politicians, and I suppose when politicians start writing history.
-----

Spin it all you want. Palin got it wrong.

[Ultra C]

04:15 PM on 06/09/2011

Hey, I was just looking for the part where she mentioned the Second Amendment, or even alluded to it in any way, shape, form or fashion. Taking one thing at a time (as I am wont to do, sorry), I was hoping you would show me exactly where she mentioned the Second Amendment. Any reference to her at all to the Constitution would probably suffice.

[Ultra C]

04:23 PM on 06/09/2011

Now, for part two: Although he was a bell ringer, on this occasion Mr. Revere did not ring any bells that we know of; however, he was certainly causing bells to be rung. And, while he did not fire any shots, he certainly caused shots to be fired. If he'd been tried in court, he'd been hung for causing shots to be fired. So, while her remarks were off the cuff and not intended to be a scholarly dissertation on the subject, they have been vindicated as being historically correct.

Contrast that with Mr. Obama's off the cuff 57 states comment, which was clearly ridiculous, and which has never been vindicated in any way.