questions for about an hour. >> the there is nothing so easy as to persuade people that they are badly governed. those words were spoken by the brilliant 18th century massachusetts governor, thomas hutchinson. i will tell you more about him later. let me tell you what else he said because his words hold true today as much as they did then and 1774. governor hutchinson said that you can take the happiest and most comfortable people and use malicious rhetorical skills to arouse popular discontent with their government, with their rulers, with everything around them, even themselves. this is one of the weaknesses he said. these are his words. this is one of the weaknesses of

human nature of which ambitious politicians make use of to serve their purposes. a year before he uttered those words, a group of boston rabble-rousers had convinced americans that they were miserable, and to "hutchinson again, those who think they are miserable are so despite all real evidence to the contrary. now i doubt if there is a single one of today's so-called tea party patriots who knows what the original tea party and tea party movement were about. far from being patriots, those original tea partiers were mostly smugglers. some of them, among the wealthiest man in america, merchants. oman them, john hancock, yes, they john hancock whose bold signature was on the declaration of independence and left his name synonymous with the word

signature. long before he put his john hancock on the declaration of independence, he was arguably among, arguably the wealthiest merchant banker in america living in an opulent mansion on top of boston's beacon hill with a commanding view of the massachusetts landscape and seascape. far from espousing individual liberty, hancock and his fellow merchants in new england governed their businesses and communities with economic ruthlessness that often left their competitors homeless and penniless. like today's tea party movement, the colonial tea party had almost nothing to do with tea. t. was nothing more than a social beverage for wealthy women. men seldom drank it and it ranked below ale and from among the beverages that americans consumed the most.

the tea party movement that sparked the american revolution actually began 20 years earlier and 1750s and 60s when new england business leaders like today's tea partiers supported a costly government war but refuse to pay higher taxes to cover the cost of that war. the war had started in the early 1750s when overpopulation in the east especially the northeast, sent british settlers pouring over the appalachian mountains into what was then french territory. france at the time claimed all of canada, the lands around the great lakes, the lands around either side of the ohio and mississippi river valleys down to the gulf of mexico.

and 1753, the governor of virginia sent a young major named george washington, and most americans don't know the story, the governor of virginia sent 21-year-old major george washington to fort duquesne, a french port that sat on the site of present-day pittsburgh before this dealer started playing football there. washington ordered the french to leave. the french refused and the following spring washington returned with troops and attacked. the story but washington fired the first shot in what became the world's first true world war. his attack on the french and the western pennsylvania wilderness grew into a global conflict that would last seven years and involve england, france, austria, prussia, russia and a dozen other nations fighting for control of colonies in north

america, africa, asia and the seas in between. the seven years war change the map of the world, shifting national borders in europe, in africa, in india and elsewhere. it leveled thousands of towns and villages in europe, killed or maimed more than a million soldiers and civilians and tank up did a dozen nations including england and france. now remember it started in britain's north american colonies and the british government and british people naturally thought reddish subjects in british north america should share the cost of the war with their fellow citizens in britain. in fact the government had raised property taxes so high in britain that farmers rioted in protest and demanded that americans pay their fair share of the war.

so in 1764, the british government extended to the colonies a stamp tax that everyone in britain have been paying for more than 70 years. it amounted to next to nothing for the average citizen, a penny or two for a stamp attached to a legal document, publications and the packages of such non-essential products as playing cards. the harshest effects of this tax however were on members of three powerful special-interest groups. they have them back then too. these three groups where the merchants, publishers and lawyers. the merchants had to put a stamp on every purchase order, on every bill of sale. publishers had to put a stamp on every newspaper and magazine and lawyers had to put a stamp on every legal document, deeds, wills and such. too clever politically ambitious

bostonians, james otis jr. and samuel adams jr. saw an opportunity to make money and to gain political power i organizing mobs of unemployed waterfront workers to protest the stamp tax and there were many of these workers left after the end of the seven years war. to win some public support for the protest, they cloak their activities under the banner of constitutional rights and claimed that americans had no representation in parliament and that for parliament to tax them without such representation was a violation of the british constitution. they were under these mobs -- under the secret day of the merchants and newspaper publishers. adams and otis sent these mobs to terrorize britain's waterfront. they attacked tax collectors, burned their homes, prevented

ships from landing. gradually, they close the waterfront and close boston to almost all british ships. adams then wrote to political leaders and other coastal cities. he was absolutely filled with a sense of power and he wanted to gain more. he convinced political leaders and other cities to follow suit or cohesive and sent harbor fronts up and down the coast and gained a national reputation as a great revolutionary leader. merchants meanwhile stopped importing british goods. within months british manufacturers and exporters absorb huge financial losses. british trade fell by 50% and the british merchants, the british exporters demanded that parliament repealed the stamp tax in america. to restore trade relations.

in 1765 parliament did just that and turned sam adams and james otis into heroes in boston and elsewhere in america. now just who were these heroes? both were from wealthy families and like many sons of wealthy new englanders, they were havard graduates. well, we all make mistakes. if they would have gone to yale they would have behaved themselves and would have gone out and gotten decent jobs. adams was the son of austin's largest brewer. you still see the name and sam adams beer has nothing to do with the original brewery. his father died when sam was 36. and tell them sam had been too lazy to make a living on his own but now he had to take control of the brewery and he quickly ran it into bankruptcy and the loud the family mansion to

deteriorate. he seemed unconcerned with earning money. he married, fathered two children and after his wife's death, this champion of liberty bought himself a slave and raise his children in abject poverty. friends of his father found him a city tax collector to ensure his earning enough to feed his children and his slave. but within a short time, his ledger showed a shortage of 8000 pounds representing tax monies he had either failed to collect or had embezzled, and he was later convicted of embezzlement. as for otis, he was a young lawyer who felt deeply humiliated when the royal governor failed to appoint his father, james otis senior, as chief justice of the colony. because of a clear conflict of interest. young otis grew a rational

swearing to undermine government in retaliation. i shall set the province in flames even if i die in the attempt he shouted. as his anger fester, he edged toward insanity, wandering into a boston tavern frequented by british officers to provoke a fight. he got it. an officer responded by coughing him over the head with a broadside of his sword. although he recovered from the physical ones, he drifted in and out of insanity for the rest of his life. at times he would poke his head out of the window and start firing into the park at unseen british enemies. one time he wandered into the state assembly, drew his sword and challenge the prime minister of england to come to boston and fight a dual. eventually france tie him down in a chair and carried him to the insane asylum. despite adams' depravity and

otis' and sanity at last adams command of a powerful force of armed thugs in boston. but a repeal of the stamp act still choking from economic drop bombs. the british government remained bankrupt with a large army in america to protect americans without any financial support from the americans. so british chancellor of the exchequer, charles townsend, he was the equivalent of our secretary of treasury, came up with a scheme to counter the adams otis argument of taxation without representation. he would no longer tax americans. he would tax the goods that britain shipped to america, lead, paint, paper and t. he reasoned that duties would be less painful for ordinary americans who could avoid paying

them by simply using homemade substitutes. farmers and their families and 95% of americans then lived on farms, farmers and their families already produced most of their own clothes, their own pottery and wooden utensils and tools and many of the other things they needed. the people most affected by import duties for the wealthy who loved their beautiful british and european furniture and furnishings, their wines and their fancy gourmet foodstuffs. when the british imposed duties to pay for the war, the duties affected the richest colonials, not the poor or the middle class. it affected those who were profiting most from the war, the shipowners, and the the merchants, the bankers. although the duties did not upset ordinary americans, they infuriated the rich merchants and shipowners who resolve resolved to evade the taxes by

smuggling. they didn't decide to smuggle because they were patriots. they decided to smuggle out of greed for profits and a proof of their motives, the their proof of their motives became evident to everyone when the british finally won the war against the french in north america. as british troops combed through the wreckage of french fortifications, they found that most of the french weapons had been smuggled through tradition naval blockades by the same new england shipowners who had been carrying military supplies to the british army. these british subjects, these merchants were smuggling arms to both sides in the war, to the enemy as well as their own army. to cloak their treason, the smugglers transform themselves into outspoken patriots claiming they didn't oppose taxes as long

as they had a vote in establishing tax laws. although that leads very well in today's history books for children, their argument was nonsense. it was nonsense then and it is nonsense now. few taxpayers and england had any representation in parliament you couldn't vote if you didn't own property and only 1 million of the 9 million adult males and britain were entitled to vote. now fair or unfair, the makeup of parliament didn't alter britain's need for money to pay for the war, or the obligation of every citizen to pay for the war, to pay taxes. the wealthiest of american colonists have profited handsomely from the war without paying for its costs and when those same merchants began smuggling to evade taxes, the british government felt justified, fully justified in

cracking down. still puffed up with pride from his tribe in the stamp tax protests, sam adams coax the merchants to sponsor another wave of protests marching as they have before and at the banners of liberties adams waterfront, thugs swarmed through austin street burning the homes of opponents and dragging those loyal to the legitimate government to what the thugs called a liberty tree to be stripped, swabbed and scalding tar covered with feathers and subjected to unmentionable agonies and humiliations. similar mobs formed in other cities. and british troops march into boston to crush the writers adams and the merchants retaliated by organizing a nationwide voip out of all british imports again. within a year, exports to america fell by 50% and as they had airing the stamp act crisis,

the british merchants forced parliament to repeal the towns and act to restore trade with america. unfortunately parliament acted too slowly to avoid the famed boston massacre. the presence of troops in boston streets had so incensed the population that unruly elements turned the redcoats soldiers into targets, first of insults and then snowballs and then stones and other missiles. a troop of redcoats finally retaliate and fired their rifles into a threatening mob one night, killing five civilians, all of them who turned out to be sam adams' thugs from the waterfront. nonetheless it is reckoned to become a citywide riot and to prevent a real civil war there, governor thomas hutchinson immediately ordered the officer and the soldiers involved in the incident jailed and brought to

trial for murder. defending them or none other than the respected american lawyers, josiah quincy and john adams, a cousin of sam. neither quincy nor adams were tories. jury. they were all local farmers and they voted unanimously to acquaint the officer and for the soldiers. they found the other two soldiers guilty of justifiable manslaughter, that'll more than a misdemeanor. just as important though, the trial exposed the role of sam adams and james otis jr. and inciting the mob. boston citizens decided they had had enough of this, enough violence and enough of sam adams. they voted him out of office and sent otis back to the insane asylum. the army command felt the same way.

their troops they said had come to america to fight the enemies of the colonists, not the colonists themselves who were after all their own countrymen. so the army pulled out of boston and peace returned to boston and the rest of the colonies. the troubles between britain and her colonists should have ended then and there with everyone living happily ever after under the union. except, except for one tiny one that remained in the economic relationship with the motherland. in repealing the towns duties, a small group of angry parliamentarians decided they needed to retain some stumble of what they insisted was parliament absolute authority to tax all british subjects with or without their consent although parliament had yielded to all the demands of the americans. its majority felt it had to

retain at least one of the townsend duties as a symbol of its authority so it retained the smallest, most innocuous one, the one on d. wow. what a colossal calculation. as i said before tea was nothing more than a woman social beverage in american homes. few americans drink even a cup of tea mac a day and a tax on tea was negligible. about one tenth of 1 penny for it a 9-penny cup, 9p. that is a tax of about 1/100th of 1%, but is thomas hutchinson put it, from so small a spark, a great fire was kindled. and its flames would eventually destroy a great empire and start the rise of another from its ashes.

as you may have guessed even the small tea tax cut somewhat into the profits of america's largest tea importer so they resumed smuggling and of course british customs officials tightened anti-smuggling enforcement and after the british seized one of john hancock's shifts for nonpayment of duties, hancock reopened his cash drawer to sam adams. adams and his paid folks to vandalize and destroy the shops and homes of anyone who sold or drank imported tea from britain or even reported by someone as having drunk some tea. if your neighbor hated you, just call somebody over and say he is drinking british tea and the house would be burned down. the tea boycott spread to other new england port cities and then down the atlantic coast to new york, philadelphia, charleston and other points. this was the original tea party

movement. it wasn't patriotic and it wasn't pretty or glorious. if you are climaxed on thursday, december 16, 1773 just before christmas with the legendary boston tea party and the dumping of about $1 million worth of british tea. the people who dump them amounted to about six, seven dozen men. many disguised themselves as indians. ironically, these white colonists who willingly slaughtered and the american indian on-site disguise themselves as -- they said indians were a symbol of freedom. regardless of this phony symbolism, the participants in the boston tea party unleashed a social, political and economic upheaval that they would never again be able to control.

the tea party provoked a reign of terror in boston and other american cities with americans inflicting unimaginable barbarities on each other. mob stomped and earn tea chips in new york, philadelphia, charleston. boston stage a second tea party a few months after the first one. the mobs termed the homes of anyone they suspected of favoring british rule and sent their dreaded imitation of the inquisition coach to the doors of citizens who dared voice support for their church, their king, their country and they are legitimate established government. the squeaking wooden tip garden arrived at dawn with drivers breaking down doors and dragging shrieking victims from their beds for transport to the liberty tree. a cheering mob always awaited

them to strip them, tar and feather them and hang them with a rope around their waists from a branch to be scorned, beaten and humiliated. this was no fight for liberty or independence. this was a civil war between british subjects over the extent of state authority and the rights of the individual. independence in the hunt and that conflict. the colonial tea partiers and those who supported them were essentially libertarians who had built businesses, carved out farms from the wilderness on their own without government help and they were not about to share profits of their labor with any government or any government tax collectors, and independence did not change matters. almost immediately after britain recognized our independence, farmers across the nation in massachusetts, new hampshire,

maryland, virginia began rioting against government taxation. this time taxation by their own elected governments in each state. it was the same conflict between the collective rights of the state, the authority of the state versus the rights of the individual. taxation by any state, any government in variable he deprives the individual of some of his property forcing him to contribute involuntarily to his community's defense and other essential services. sometimes non-essential services. the postal service and essential government function or can private industry do a better job? is public transport and essential government service or should we leave in private hands? these are questions we still debate. although the ratification of the constitution and the creation of the federal government answers answer some of these questions, and calm things down a bit, they

arrested again into all-out civil war in the mid-19th century when many americans felt the federal government had usurped state and local powers. slavery was central to the civil war that northerners tended to oversimplify the nature of that conflict. even americans who opposed slavery and the north as well as the south and supported emancipation recognize that the emancipation proclamation with all its good intentions, also represented government confiscation of property. it is horrible to think think of human beings as property, but they were. the civil war did not and that conflict. it flared up again during the civil rights movement in the 20th century when the federal government essentially usurp authority over education and again during the vietnam war when the executive usurped authority to lead the nation to war. and the debate continues today with the emergence of the modern

tea party movement that is trying to pause and even reverse the expanding federal government intrusion into our daily lives. the problem that tea partiers today face is what one man defined as government intrusion, another man defined as an essential subsidy for the national economy. i am sure that farmers, if you asked a farmer today or a highway engineer or an oilman the definition of abe naugle, they are not going to say agricultural subsidies or subsidies to the oil industry or subsidies for highway construction. we can only hope that the growing tea party movement today does not divide the nation and produce the conflict it did in the 18th century.

at the time massachusetts chief justice peter oliver describe the horrors produced by the colonial tea party movement in his memoirs. the tarring and feathering and riots reigned uncontrolled. the liberty of the press was her stained -- restrained by the very men who had been to lilling for liberty. those printers who are inclined to support government were threatened, their presses destroyed and all this uproar arose from the selfish designs of the merchants, mocked patriots who disguise their private views biden mouthing it for liberty. but who were willing to sacrifice everything for money. the turmoil of the colonial tea party movement strips tens of tauzin's of americans of their dignity, their homes, their properties and their birthrights in the name of liberty and independence.

nearly 100,000 americans left the land of their forefathers forever in what was history's largest exit of american from america, and untold thousands who refuse to leave their native lands westward into the dangerous wilderness to start life anew under new identities. among those forced to flee to england and be buried in foreign soil was the last royal governor of massachusetts, thomas hutchinson whose forebears arrived in america in 1634 and included the great religious leader, ann hutchinson. he adored this country. it belonged to him as much as it did to sam adams, more so. he had served his country and its government, in its wars. sam adams had never done it -- that. before hutchinson died, he wrote

these words. i am sometimes tempted to endeavor to forget that i am an american and to turn my views from my native -- to turn my views torts remains of life in england but my passion for my native country returns and though we know not how to reason upon it, i feel a fondness to lay my bones in my native american soil. justice peter oliver also from an old american family also fled to england and lies. there. george washington and other respected american leaders across the country condemned the boston tea partiers as vandals and they might well attended in jails and faded into obscurity had the british government not responded so rashly and so violently by sending troops back to boston.

.. >> all 13 states declared independence from britain, and who were those original tea partyers, the men on the ships, who set off the exposure that sparked a revolution and helped

bring down one empire and helped create another? who boarded those ships and dumped the tea in boston harbor? sam adams hancock at the time swore not to present each other's name to prevent immediate death on the gallows. their names remained secret decades after the tea party, but they are now listed in my new book. [laughter] i believe the list will surprise you. one irony of the tea party, however, is that none of those who dumped tea into boston harbor rose to prom nans in the government of the mages that rose from the revolution, and that's because the kind of men who lead revolutions and destroy governments, the sam adams' in america seldom have the

qualities needed to organize and build a new government or nation. they never nurture. their instincts are to destroy, to kill, and a second irony of the revolution that the tea party sparked is that instead of eliminating taxation, it in connection withed 10 -- increased it 10,000 fold. local governments had to pay for the cost of defense, law enforcement, postal services, and all the other government services that the british government paid for before independence. up stead of paying a small single duty on tea, massachusetts imposed huge duties on every product that passed through its ports and collected it. apart from the cost of the tea that was lost in the tea party that was dumped overboard, the boston tea party was undoubtedly the most costly tea party in

world history. thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. i'll be happy to answer your questions. [applause] thank you. thank you very much. i'll be happy to answer any questions and the gentleman over there will have a microphone for you to be heard across the nation and across the world. don't faint. >> where did they originate? >> where? >> in europe or in the colonies? [inaudible] >> oh, tar and feathering, that would have originated here as far as i know. it was not a custom in england. yes, sir? >> was there any organized support in the colonies, any of them, which were called loyalists? >> organized support for? >> for what you might call

loyalists supporting -- >> oh, yes, across the nation. at least one-third of the population were absolutely loyal subjects of britain, and in the debate over independence in the continental congress, only days before the actual declaration of independence, john dickinson of philadelphia authored the olive branch petition to the king pledging our loyalty, american loyalty to the king, love of the king, love of being british subjects and simply asking for him to control the parliament and to let us raise our own taxes and keep parliament our business. had he accepted the olive branch petition, we probably would have become a member of the british commonwealth. there was tremendous amount of

loyalty and even loyalists forces. there was a major battle that's often not mentioned, i don't know whether this is prejudice or what, but a major battle in moore's creek, north carolina, not for from wilmington, north carolina. they were going to land solders at wilmington, and they were marching towards the coast to join up with the british regulars. a force that were rebels, but we call patriots, interpreted them and massacred them at moore's creek in the lined gulch where rebels waited for them and wiped them out. without the loyalist troops, the british could not land, and that kept the south free of british

control for a few years until they landed at charleston. yes, sir? >> you mentioned that the boston tea party spread north into new york and other cities, but it sounds like there was almost a network of people who had the same thought or were inspired one way or another or working together. i never thought of the boston tear party as being that, but is that really? >> yes. sam adams set it up because there's no other form of communication in those days, set up a series of correspondents in every mayorty in the country, and they communicated with each other, and that's how word was passed and how we eventually decided on a continue then --

continental congress for these all to meet in philadelphia and discuss independence. >> wasn't the tea party in new jersey before -- >> i'm sorry, i can't hear you. >> the tea party in new jersey, wasn't that before the boston tea party? >> which tea party? >> the one in new jersey. >> no, afterwards. >> afterwards? >> yeah. it was another tea party i didn't mention that they dumped a tea ship in new jersey which most people never heard of it, and i didn't until i did research on this book, but it's along the delaware river opposite philadelphia. yes, ma'am? >> can you talk about what sources you used to write the book or are they new ones or reinterpretations? >> well, nothing is new, and the sources are almost endless and

obviously the diaries and writings of john adams, the writings of john adams are, i think, seven volumes and the diaries are four volumes. the writings of sam adams, the writings of thomas hutchenson, all prolific writers keeping diaries and kept all their correspondence. it's a rich pool of research. yes, sir? >> all of this information you've disclosed, why was it dormant for so long? >> well, it's not dore manet. it's there in bits and pieces, and the problem with american history, i think i can generalize all american history,

but certainly the history of the colonial and revolutionary, and post-revolutionary war era is it's very complex. when my son was about 14, he came home from school saying, you know something dad? american history, all they do is talk. in american history, there's a lot of action, but all they do is talk. well, he's right. the talk is very complex on very, very complex issues that philosophers and political interests have been debating for many, many years. this involved enormously potential conflicts for the world and the devine right of kings and aristocrats. slavery itself, the rights of the individual. this was the age of

enlightenment, and our revolution culminated the age of enlightenment of which these philosophers, authors, and thinkers in the western world were debating the rights of the individual, what they called the natural rights of the individual. with respect all men born -- weren't all men born with equal rights opposed to the devine rights of kings? these were very, very complicated issues, and to condense all this into a history book this thick that an adolescent has to get through in 26 weeks or whatever the length of the school year is, it's impossible. it's impossible, so the authors of american history and especially the texts that most americans grow up studying have to condense it and make it really simplistic. yes, sir? >> have you started another

project that you could -- have you started another project that you can relate to us now what you're writing your next book, sir? >> yeah, bring on these other books. [laughter] my next book, actually my next book is going to have small readership. it's about a french play wright who was also a brilliant inventer, thinker, a brilliant spy, and a great libertarian, and he organized and convinced the french king that by supporting the american revolution, the french could undermind and weaken their traditional enemy, britain, who had beaten the pants off of them in the seven years war, and he was responsible for organizing the dummy corporations that in france that shipped french arms,

they were not obsolete here, from the seven year war, shipped them here to the american rebels, and indeed he was responsible for the surprise victory at saratoga. the arms arrived in ports smith just in time, and berlin was about to beat us, and then the arms came, and we were able to durn the war around. the book is called "the improbable patriot," but the next book directly on this period comes out in a year called "the seven pillars of power," and it's about how george washington took this presidency and turned it to what many now call the imperial

presidency, and he did this on his own. people credit hamilton, but it was he, george washington. yes, sir? >> you mentioned the name john hancock in connection with the boston tea party. he was the leading merchant in the colonies, but what was his part in the boston tea party? >> well, he wanted no part of it. he wanted to continue smuggling and making money. he was arguably the wealthiest merchant banker in america. there was no hard currency in this hemisphere at the time, and so merchants, everything was on barter, and merchants, large mother chapters like hancock would provide seed or tools to say a farmer or a smaller merchant, and against, for example, the farmer's crop in the spring, futures, and that's

why they were called mother chapter bankers because they were lending money, they were fulfilling the role of a modern banker as well as a modern merchant. his uncle build a business, and the house of hancock was the largest merchant bank in america. now, suddenly the rioters were all over the place threatening any merchant who does business with england, and he tried to straddle the road for as long as he could, but as the mobs became more and more powerful and began burning down the mansions. they burned down the mansion of thomas hutchenson. his father was a merchant banker, and it was one the most beautiful homes in america

designed by jones and the rioters went out there and burned that house down from top to bottomment one of the rioters in the diary described how it fell to the ground, but they destroyed manuscripts that went back to america's founding. hutchenson was not an amateur historian, but he was a brilliantly educated man with advanced degrees in history, and he wrote, and this is still available -- i have three volumes, history of massachusetts from its very beginnings, but the documents to support that history, original manuscripts from the time of the early landings in massachusetts were all destroyed by these rioters. hancock didn't want that to happen to himself, and he tried to make peace with sam adams and sat on the fence as long as he

could, and finally, he had to give money to support adams and become a part. he decided it would be more advantageous for them to try to take control of the rebel movement which he eventually did, and when ms. declared -- massachusetts declared independence, he was legislated first governor of massachusetts putting him in control of the massachusetts independence movement and forced sam adams into the background. sam adams went to the constitutional convention and was there for two, i think two, possibly three terms, but never again was a figure of importance in either national or massachusetts history. he became governor of

massachusetts, he was vice governor during hancock's last term at the beginning of the 19th century. hancock died, he exceeded to the governorship, elected for one term, and then he died, but he never again had importance in american or state politics. >> [inaudible] >> we have time for one more question. >> [inaudible] >> wait for the microphone, please. >> what was the relationship between sam and john adams? >> well, obviously, they knew each other at the continue thenal congress. they both served in the continental congresses, so they knew each other there. john adams was a stodge conservative, and sam was a fiery radical. when sam was in the continental congress, most of the congress, they were not called

congressmen, but most of the delegates there isolated him and the other radicals and they had little to do in the continental congress' at the beginning of the war or during the war. indeed, sam adams, he couldn't organize his own business in his own home. he had no place in the congress, and john hancock was elected president of the continental congress. first president was from virginia, but he got sick in three or four months, and john hancock was the first effective president of the congress, and when the articles of confederation were signed, he remained president of the congress, and ergo the first president of the united states in fact, if not in title, and he was brilliant administer. one would have to be to run the business he did. he was a brilliant administer,

and he helped washington win the war. he really had a very difficult time trying to organize the purchase of arms and material because congress had no right to tax or powers to tax, so hancock had to send em baa cares to europe to get loans, and he was very successful at doing it. well, thank you again, ladies and gentlemen. [applause] >> for more information, visit the website at harlowgilesunger.com. >> today, in an hour, we'll cover several hours of world history and touch every part of the planet. ready to go on the journey? we touch all of these places.

it did actually start from two family stories, and so if we can look at the world map -- we were in jerusalem in israel visiting with my family, and i asked about the story of one of my aunts, a mysterious aunt of mine, a non-jewish woman who married into our jewish family, and i wondered about the story about her. her grandfather had been a serf in russia. do you remember what a serf is? hold on, you in the back row. hand this to him. >> i think it was a slave. >> they were very much like a slave. they could be bought and colted

with the land. he invented a process for working with beat sugar that was so useful, he became so rich that he bought his freedom. when we learned about that, we learned about a connection to marina's family. >> so, i had always known about my family's connection to sugar because my great grandparents traveled from india across to giana which is in south america, but considered part of the caribbean, and they came to cut, to work on sugar plantations. part of what's fascinated us is what is this substance where someone in his family all the way in russia, a serf, and someone in my family looking to get a better life over here in

india, and then over to the caribbean, why does substance affect people from such different parts of the world? >> before we trace that out, we want to ask you a question. how many of you think you might have sugar somewhere in your family background? that's one, two, three, oh, man, yes, yes. >> what i'm going to do is bring it out. i just want to hear from a couple of year where your family might have been from, okay? >> well, i think my family might have been in the caribbean. >> caribbean, okay, very good. >> absolutely. >> okay. >> i feel my family was either in the caribbean or in europe. >> very good. >> okay, okay. >> both. >> i think my family was either in the caribbean or europe. >> okay, very good.

anybody else here? >> actually i know that my family was from the caribbean, and that's where i get it from. >> if you have the caribbean in your backgrounds, you definitely have sugar in your background, but we believed that many more people have sugar in their background than they know, and we're about to take you, as i say, spinning around the world, and the subtitle of her book is a story of magic, spice, slavery, freedom, and science, and let's start out with magic. why might we relate sugar kane originally was very first off the edge, on the far edge. we know that it was first grown in gnu new new guinea.

have you tasted sugar cane? all right. we do know that sugar cane was first grown in new guinea and brought up to india, and the reason we know that is there are prayers to the goddess durga where you would burn various offerings to the goddess, and one of the offerings you burned was sugar cane, and the original word in the original indian language for sugar was that for which brings sweetness to the people, but at a certain point, the name for this substance changed, and the new name for it was sharkara which means gravel.

can anybody guess why you would use a word that means gravel for sugar cane or for sugar? >> you might use gravel because when you put it in your hand, it kind of like -- it came out like sand, and sand is like gravel. >> you are exactly right. originally, they had cane, but they had learned how to make cane into sugar, and this is one of the crucial things. sugar granules do not exist in nature. what exists in nature is the cane. we had to learn how to turn the cane into those little pieces of sugar, and we'll get to that, but before we get to that, the question is how did knowledge of sugar cane spread? how did they learn about this plant growing in new gipny? this substance used in religion

in india? does anyone remember who might have brought knowledge of sugar across -- that back row is great. i think the second guy there has not spoken yet. >> christopher columbus. >> your ahead of us, buddy. we're way back. >> i think it's the -- i think it spread because it went across the world, and i think china had it? >> yeah, but before china gets it, there's someone -- there's a woman there on the end. >> i think it was -- i think it was the slaves. >> that's later. we're way back. we're in bc, guys. we're way, way back. >> the australians. >> no, no australians. >> the greeks. >> yes, alexander the great. if any of you remember the stories, alexander the great is

conquering across from greece. he's conquering across the iran. he's conquering -- he gets to the edge of india, and his troops say, i won't go any further. i've gone as far as i'm going to go, but alexander is conquering, has this you hunger to know. he can never know enough. he sends his friend in a boat to explore india and find out stuff. he comes back and talks about the reeds that give honey though there are no bees. now, why would you describe sugar cane as the reed that gives hunny though there are no bees? >> because it was sweet? >> yes, and why else? you'll get a chance. >> because the honey, bees

produce the honey, and with sugar canes, they didn't need bees. >> right. if before people knew about sugar cape, how might they have sweetened their food? what ways did they sweeten their foods? >> they would use mashed fruits and honey and sap from a maple tree. >> very good. you all may remember that in north america, there were no bees, north and south america. they didn't have honey, so what they had was maple syrup, the agave cactus, and in the rest of the world, they had honey, so we have had sugar used in magical ceremonies. we had sugar now that is spreading, and people are starting to learn about it -- >> but one thing we want to mention when you say that they used, let's say honey or