Dear Pamela,As a Brit, it’s nice to see someone from ‘over the pond’ who’s got most of the information about Afternoon Tea correct for a change: I now live in Vinci, Italy (yes where Leonardo was born), and now offer afternoon tea to Italians in our home dining would take you to task on one item in your article,(there’s always a critic!) and that is about Cream Tea in which you say: “Cream Tea — A simple tea service consisting of scones, clotted cream, marmalade or lemon curd and tea.” Cream Tea traditionally consists of scones served with clotted cream and strawberry said that if people prefer to have their scones (and it’s pronounced ‘skons’ as far as I’m concerned),with an alternative, I have no problem with that, it’s a free world (supposedly)!For example I sometimes fill my Victoria Sponge with lemon curd instead of the traditional raspberry jam and fresh raspberries both of which balance well with a nice cup of sweet Luck with the book!
We shall have much disbelief to overcome. For what the leaders of the Revolutionary movement themselves said lay behind the convulsion of the time – what they themselves said was the cause of it – was nothing less than a deliberate “design” – a conspiracy – of ministers of state and their underlings to overthrow the British constitution, both in England and in America, and to blot out, or at least severely reduce, English liberties. This undertaking, it was said, which had long been brewing, had been nourished in corruption – rank, festering corruption, rising from the inmost recesses of the English polity and coursing through every vein. What was happening in America through the 1760’s, point by point in the controversy with England, could be seen, by the end of that decade, as fitting a pattern of concerted malevolence familiar to every eighteenth-century student of history and politics. Britain, it was said, was following Greece, Rome, France, Venice, Denmark, Sweden – in fact almost the whole of continental Europe – from the liberty of a free constitution into autocracy, and the colonies, for reasons variously explained, were in the van. Individual details – Stamp Act, Townshend Duties, Boston Massacre, and ultimately and overwhelmingly the Coercive Acts – added up to something greater, more malevolent than their simple sum, which was finally and fully revealed in the substitution of military for civil actions in 1775.
I"m not sure how you tend to address the Boston Tea Party; but if you wish to discuss how it affected the colonies' relationship with Britain, you might use as your thesis that the Tea Party was in reaction to perceived interference by the East India Company with Colonial commerce. It met with considerable criticism on both sides of the Atlantic. Many in the colonies believed that the perpetrators had overreacted; in fact Benjamin Franklin offered to pay for the tea from his own funds. In Britain, the Tea Party led to imposition of the Coercive Acts. Though intended to punish the people of Boston for the raid and bring them into line, it had the opposite effect and brought the formerly disunited colonies together in protest.