The Articles of Confederation: An Interpretation of the Social-Constitutional History of the American Revolution, 1774-1781

by Merrill Jensen

"Here is a book which deals with clashes between economic and political factors in the American Revolution as realistically as if its author were dealing with a presidential election."— Social Studies

"An admirable analysis.  It presents, in succinct form, the results of a generation of study of this chapter of our history and summarizes fairly the conclusions of that study."—Henry Steele Commager, New York Times Book Review

Genres: History, Politics, American History, Government, American Revolution

312 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1940

About the author

Merrill Monroe Jensen was an American historian whose research and writing focused on the ratification of the United States Constitution. His historical interpretations are generally considered to be of the "Progressive School" of American history, the most famous exponent of which was Charles A. Beard. Jensen served as a professor of history at both the University of Washington (1935–1944), where he was editor of Pacific Northwest Quarterly, and the University of Wisconsin–Madison (1944–1976).

Reviews

[Nicholas]

A valiant, although ultimately unconvincing, attempt to portray the revolutionary era as a class struggle between the pro-independent farmer "radicals" who controlled the writing of the Articles of Confederation and the reluctantly independent aristocratic "conservatives" who ultimately recaptured the government and replaced the Articles with the Constitution.

[Brandon Whitaker]

This was an interesting and edifying read, but not exactly what I was hoping for. Jensen's reading of the American Revolution has a strongly reductionist bent, aiming in most cases to explain decisions and tensions entirely in terms of power dynamics and personal gain. It would certainly be naive to imagine that the Revolution was motivated by a band of pure, disinterested, like-minded philosophers, but it is equally inadequate to treat it as nothing more than a squabble for power and land. There are strong idealistic currents running through both the radical and conservative sides of the debate over the Articles of Confederation, and it seems at times that Jensen gives them short shrift. Nonetheless, it is a worthwhile read for the context it provides. I will also call attention to the timeframe, to which I paid insufficient attention: this book focuses on the earlier revolutionary arguments and the ratification of the Articles, and it is not focused as much on the troubles with the confederation that gave rise to the Constitution. If you are interested in that portion of history as I am, this book will only briefly touch on it.

[Fran]

Written back in 1940s, I first read it decades ago. Still important, and key to understanding those largely ignored years of what was the first constitution of the United States of America - and the forces that brought about the campaign to replace the Articles.

[Stan Lanier]

While I understand there is scholarly disagreement with Jensen's interpretation offered in this book, it is a position that seems to make imminent sense. It is a good introduction-- given the politics our contemporary period, Jensen's view is plausible, and it would seem that many of the same interests alive in this period of our history are still contending for power today. Other books to be read to round out an understanding of the history of the Articles are Jack Rakove's The Beginnings of National Politics and Gordon Wood's The Creation of the American Republic 1776-1787.

[James Violand]

No wonder we needed a new constitution. This book describes the Articles ineffectiveness.