What Was the Main Factor That Led to Shays Rebellion

Armed uprising in the U.Southward.

Shays’ Rebellion

An artist’s depiction of the rebellion: Shays’ troops repulsed from the armory at Springfield, Massachusetts in early on 1787

Date August 29, 1786 – February 1787

Western Massachusetts

Caused by
  • Economic policy
  • Ambitious tax and debt collection
  • Political corruption and cronyism
Goals Reform of state government, afterward its overthrow
Methods Directly action to close courts, then military machine organization in an attempt to capture the US arsenal at the Springfield Armory
Resulted in Rebellion crushed, and problems of Federal authorization linked to the Articles of Confederation spur U.s. Ramble Convention
Parties to the civil conflict

Anti-government protesters

United States

The states

  • Massachusetts state militia
  • Privately funded local militia
Lead figures
  • Daniel Shays
  • Luke Twenty-four hour period
  • Eli Parsons
  • Job Shattuck
  • James Bowdoin
  • Benjamin Lincoln
  • William Shepard

4,000+ (largest strength 1,500)

4,000+ (largest force 3,000)

Casualties and losses
  • 6 killed
  • Dozens wounded
  • Many arrested
  • 2 hanged afterward
  • 3 killed[1]
  • Dozens wounded


was an armed insurgence in Western Massachusetts and Worcester in response to a debt crunch amidst the citizenry and in opposition to the land authorities’south increased efforts to collect taxes both on individuals and their trades.[two]
The fight took place mostly in and effectually Springfield during 1786 and 1787. American Revolutionary War veteran Daniel Shays led four thousand rebels (called Shaysites) in a protest against economical and civil rights injustices. Shays was a farmhand from Massachusetts at the showtime of the Revolutionary War; he joined the Continental Army, saw action at the Battles of Lexington and Agree, Battle of Bunker Loma, and Battles of Saratoga, and was eventually wounded in action.

In 1787, Shays’ rebels marched on the federal Springfield Arsenal in an unsuccessful endeavour to seize its weaponry and overthrow the authorities. The confederal authorities found itself unable to finance troops to put down the rebellion, and it was consequently put down past the Massachusetts State militia and a privately funded local militia. The widely held view was that the Articles of Confederation needed to exist reformed as the country’southward governing certificate, and the events of the rebellion served equally a catalyst for the Ramble Convention and the creation of the new authorities.[5]

In that location is still debate amongst scholars concerning the rebellion’south influence on the Constitution and its ratification.



Populist Governor John Hancock refused to scissure downwardly on tax delinquencies and accepted devalued paper currency for debts.

Artist’s depiction of protesters watching a debtor in a scuffle with a tax collector by the courthouse at Springfield, Massachusetts. The coup was a tax-related rebellion.

The economic system during the American Revolutionary War was largely subsistence agronomics in the rural parts of New England, particularly in the hill towns of central and western Massachusetts. Some residents in these areas had few assets beyond their land, and they bartered with 1 another for appurtenances and services. In lean times, farmers might obtain goods on credit from suppliers in local market towns who would exist paid when times were meliorate.[6]
In contrast, in that location was a market economic system in the more economically adult coastal areas of Massachusetts Bay and in the fertile Connecticut River Valley, driven by the activities of wholesale merchants dealing with Europe and the W Indies.[seven]
The state regime was dominated by this merchant class.[viii]

When the Revolutionary War ended in 1783, Massachusetts merchants’ European business partners refused to extend lines of credit to them and insisted that they pay for goods with hard currency, despite the state-wide shortage of such currency. Merchants began to need the same from their local business partners, including those operating in the market place towns in the state’s interior.[9]
Many of these merchants passed on this need to their customers, although Governor John Hancock did not impose hard currency demands on poorer borrowers and refused to actively prosecute the collection of delinquent taxes.[10]
The rural farming population was by and large unable to meet the demands of merchants and the civil regime, and some began to lose their land and other possessions when they were unable to fulfill their debt and tax obligations. This led to strong resentments against tax collectors and the courts, where creditors obtained judgments confronting debtors, and where taxation collectors obtained judgments authorizing holding seizures.[xi]
A farmer identified as “Plough Jogger” summarized the situation at a meeting convened by aggrieved commoners:[12]

I have been greatly abused, have been obliged to do more than my part in the war, been loaded with class rates, town rates, province rates, Continental rates, and all rates … been pulled and hauled past sheriffs, constables, and collectors, and had my cattle sold for less than they were worth… The swell men are going to get all nosotros have and I think information technology is fourth dimension for u.s.a. to rising and put a end to it, and take no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers.

Veterans had received little pay during the war and faced added difficulty collecting payments owed to them from the State or the Congress of the Confederation.[12]
Some soldiers began to organize protests confronting these oppressive economic conditions. In 1780, Daniel Shays resigned from the army unpaid and went dwelling house to notice himself in court for non-payment of debts. He soon realized that he was non lonely in his inability to pay his debts and began organizing for debt relief.[15]

Early on rumblings


Governor James Bowdoin instituted a heavy taxation burden and stepped upward a collection of dorsum taxes.

One early protest against the authorities was led by Job Shattuck of Groton, Massachusetts in 1782, who organized residents to physically prevent tax collectors from doing their piece of work.[16]
A second, larger-scale protest took identify in Uxbridge, Massachusetts on the Rhode Island edge on February iii, 1783, when a mob seized property that had been confiscated by a constable and returned it to its owners. Governor Hancock ordered the sheriff to suppress these actions.[17]

Most rural communities attempted to use the legislative process to proceeds relief. Petitions and proposals were repeatedly submitted to the land legislature to issue paper currency, which would depreciate the currency and make it possible to pay a high-value debt with lower-valued paper. The merchants were opposed to the idea, including James Bowdoin, since they stood to lose from such measures, and the proposals were repeatedly rejected.[18]

Governor Hancock resigned in early 1785 citing health reasons, though some suggested that he was anticipating problem.[19]
Bowdoin had repeatedly lost to Hancock in earlier elections, just he was elected governor that year—and matters became more severe. He stepped up ceremonious actions to collect back taxes, and the legislature exacerbated the situation by levying an additional belongings tax to raise funds for the state’south portion of foreign debt payments.[20]
Even comparatively conservative commentators such as John Adams observed that these levies were “heavier than the People could bear”.[21]

Shutting down the courts


Protests in rural Massachusetts turned into direct action in Baronial 1786 later the state legislature adjourned without considering the many petitions that had been sent to Boston.[22]
On August 29, a well-organized force of protestors formed in Northampton, Massachusetts and successfully prevented the county courtroom from sitting.[24]
The leaders of this force proclaimed that they were seeking relief from the crushing judicial processes that were depriving the people of their country and possessions. They called themselves
Regulators, a reference to the Regulator movement of North Carolina which sought to reform corrupt practices in the late 1760s.[25]

This modern map of Massachusetts is annotated to evidence points of disharmonize. Places where war machine conflicts occurred are highlighted in reddish; the others are locations of courthouses that were close down. The Quabbin Reservoir did not be at the time betwixt Petersham and Northampton.

Governor Bowdoin issued a announcement on September two denouncing such mob action, only he took no military measures beyond planning a militia response to time to come actions.[24]
The court was then shut down in Worcester, Massachusetts past like action on September 5, merely the county militia refused to plough out, as information technology was composed mainly of men sympathetic to the protestors.[27]
Governors of the neighboring states acted decisively, calling out the militia to hunt downward the ringleaders in their own states after the outset such protests.[28]
Matters were resolved without violence in Rhode Island because the “country political party” gained control of the legislature in 1786 and enacted measures forcing its merchants to merchandise debt instruments for devalued currency. Boston’s merchants were concerned by this, especially Bowdoin who held more £three,000 in Massachusetts notes.[29]

Read:   Why Do Melting Ice Caps Make Earth Warmer

Daniel Shays had participated in the Northampton action and began to accept a more than agile part in the uprising in November, though he firmly denied that he was ane of its leaders. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts indicted xi leaders of the rebellion equally “disorderly, riotous, and seditious persons”.[15]
The court was scheduled to meet side by side in Springfield, Massachusetts on September 26, and Shays organized an attempt to shut it down in Northampton, while Luke 24-hour interval organized an attempt in Springfield.[thirty]
They were anticipated past William Shepard, the local militia commander, who began gathering government-supporting militia the Saturday earlier the courtroom was to sit down, and he had 300 men protecting the Springfield courthouse by opening fourth dimension. Shays and Day were able to recruit a similar number but chose simply to demonstrate, exercising their troops exterior of Shepard’south lines rather than attempting to seize the building.[thirty]
The judges get-go postponed hearings and and then adjourned on the 28th without hearing any cases. Shepard withdrew his force (which had grown to some 800 men) to the Springfield Armory, which was rumored to be the target of the protestors.[31]

Militia general William Shepard dedicated the Springfield Arsenal against rebel activeness.

Protests were also successful in shutting downward courts in Great Barrington, Concord, and Taunton, Massachusetts in September and October.[24]
James Warren wrote to John Adams on Oct 22, “We are now in a state of Anarchy and Defoliation bordering on Civil State of war.”[32]
Courts were able to meet in the larger towns and cities, merely they required protection of the militia which Bowdoin called out for the purpose.[24]
Governor Bowdoin commanded the legislature to “vindicate the insulted dignity of government”. Samuel Adams claimed that foreigners (“British emissaries”) were instigating treason amid citizens. Adams helped depict up a Riot Act and a resolution suspending
habeas corpus
then the authorities could legally keep people in jail without trial.

Adams proposed a new legal distinction that rebellion in a republic should exist punished by execution.[15]
The legislature also moved to make some concessions on matters that upset farmers, maxim that certain old taxes could now be paid in goods instead of hard currency.[15]
These measures were followed by one prohibiting speech critical of the government and offering pardons to protestors willing to have an adjuration of allegiance.[33]
These legislative actions were unsuccessful in quelling the protests,[15]
and the break of
habeas corpus
alarmed many.[34]

Warrants were issued for the arrest of several of the protest ringleaders, and a posse of some 300 men rode to Groton on November 28 to abort Chore Shattuck and other rebel leaders in the area. Shattuck was chased downwardly and arrested on the 30th and was wounded past a sword slash in the process.[35]
This action and the abort of other protest leaders in the eastern parts of the land angered those in the west, and they began to organize an overthrow of the state government. “The seeds of war are now sown”, wrote 1 correspondent in Shrewsbury,[36]
and by mid-January insubordinate leaders spoke of slap-up the “tyrannical authorities of Massachusetts”.[37]



The federal authorities had been unable to recruit soldiers for the army because of a lack of funding, so Massachusetts leaders decided to act independently. On January 4, 1787, Governor Bowdoin proposed creating a privately funded militia ground forces. Former Continental Army Full general Benjamin Lincoln solicited funds and raised more than £half-dozen,000 from more than 125 merchants by the end of Jan.[38]
The 3,000 militiamen who were recruited into this regular army were well-nigh entirely from the eastern counties of Massachusetts, and they marched to Worcester on January 19.[39]

While the government forces assembled, Shays and Day and other rebel leaders in the west organized their forces establishing regional regimental organizations that were run by democratically elected committees. Their first major target was the federal armory in Springfield.[40]
General Shepard had taken possession of the arsenal under orders from Governor Bowdoin, and he used its arsenal to arm a militia force of i,200. He had washed this even though the armory was federal property, not land, and he did not have permission from Secretarial assistant at State of war Henry Knox.[41]

The insurgents were organized into three major groups and intended to environment and attack the armory simultaneously. Shays had one group eastward of Springfield most Palmer. Luke Day had a second force across the Connecticut River in W Springfield. A third forcefulness under Eli Parsons was situated to the north at Chicopee.[43]
The rebels originally had planned their assault for January 25. At the concluding moment, Day changed this engagement and sent a message to Shays indicating that he would not be ready to attack until the 26th.[44]
Day’s bulletin was intercepted by Shepard’s men. As such, the militias of Shays and Parsons approached the armory on the 25th non knowing that they would have no support from the west.[45]
Instead, they found Shepard’south militia waiting for them. Shepard start ordered warning shots fired over the heads of Shays’ men. He then ordered two cannons to fire grape shot. Four Shaysites were killed and 20 wounded. There was no musket fire from either side. The rebel advance collapsed[46]
with most of the rebel forces fleeing northward. Both Shays’ men and Day’southward men eventually regrouped at Amherst, Massachusetts.[47]

General Lincoln immediately began marching west from Worcester with the 3,000 men that had been mustered. The rebels moved more often than not due north and e to avert him, eventually establishing a camp at Petersham, Massachusetts. They raided the shops of local merchants for supplies along the way and took some of the merchants hostage. Lincoln pursued them and reached Pelham, Massachusetts on February 2, some 20 miles (32 km) from Petersham.[48]
He led his militia on a forced march to Petersham through a bitter snowstorm on the night of February iii–4, arriving early in the morning. They surprised the rebel camp then thoroughly that the rebels scattered “without time to phone call in their out parties or fifty-fifty their guards”.[49]
Lincoln claimed to capture 150 men but none of them were officers, and historian Leonard Richards has questioned the veracity of the report. Most of the leadership escaped north into New Hampshire and Vermont, where they were sheltered despite repeated demands that they be returned to Massachusetts for trial.[50]



Lincoln’s march marked the cease of large-scale organized resistance. Ringleaders who eluded capture fled to neighboring states, and pockets of local resistance continued. Some rebel leaders approached Lord Dorchester for assistance, the British governor of the Province of Quebec who reportedly promised assistance in the course of Mohawk warriors led past Joseph Brant.[51]
Dorchester’s proposal was vetoed in London, however, and no assistance came to the rebels.[52]
The aforementioned day that Lincoln arrived at Petersham, the state legislature passed bills authorizing a state of martial constabulary and giving the governor broad powers to act against the rebels. The bills also authorized state payments to reimburse Lincoln and the merchants who had funded the army and authorized the recruitment of additional militia.[53]
On February xvi, 1787, the Massachusetts legislature passed the Disqualification Act to preclude a legislative response past insubordinate sympathizers. This pecker forbade any best-selling rebels from property a variety of elected and appointed offices.[54]

Most of Lincoln’s army melted away in tardily February every bit enlistments expired, and he allowable just 30 men at a base in Pittsfield by the end of the month.[55]
In the concurrently, some 120 rebels had regrouped in New Lebanon, New York, and they crossed the border on February 27, marching first on Stockbridge, Massachusetts, a major market place town in the southwestern corner of the state. They raided the shops of merchants and the homes of merchants and local professionals. This came to the attention of Brigadier John Ashley, who mustered a strength of some 80 men and caught up with the rebels in nearby Sheffield tardily in the twenty-four hours for the bloodiest come across of the rebellion: 30 rebels were wounded (one mortally), at least one government soldier was killed, and many were wounded.[56]
Ashley was further reinforced subsequently the encounter, and he reported taking 150 prisoners.[57]

Read:   All Trading of Currencies on the Forex Takes Place



4 g people signed confessions acknowledging participation in the events of the rebellion in exchange for amnesty. Several hundred participants were eventually indicted on charges relating to the rebellion, but most of these were pardoned under a full general amnesty that excluded only a few ringleaders. Eighteen men were convicted and sentenced to death, but virtually of these had their sentences commuted or overturned on appeal, or were pardoned. John Bly and Charles Rose, however, were hanged on December 6, 1787.[58]
They were also accused of a common-law crime, as both were looters.

Shays was pardoned in 1788 and he returned to Massachusetts from hiding in the Vermont woods.[59]
He was vilified by the Boston press, who painted him equally an archetypal anarchist opposed to the authorities.[sixty]
He subsequently moved to the Conesus, New York area, where he died poor and obscure in 1825.[59]

The crushing of the rebellion and the harsh terms of reconciliation imposed by the Disqualification Human action all worked against Governor Bowdoin politically. He received few votes from the rural parts of the state and was trounced by John Hancock in the gubernatorial election of 1787.[61]
The armed forces victory was tempered by tax changes in subsequent years. The legislature cut taxes and placed a moratorium on debts and likewise refocused state spending away from interest payments, resulting in a 30-percent turn down in the value of Massachusetts securities equally those payments fell in arrears.[62]

Vermont was an unrecognized contained commonwealth that had been seeking independent statehood from New York’s claims to the territory. It became an unexpected beneficiary of the rebellion by sheltering the rebel ringleaders. Alexander Hamilton bankrupt from other New Yorkers, including major landowners with claims on Vermont territory, calling for the land to recognize and back up Vermont’south bid for admission to the union. He cited Vermont’south de facto independence and its ability to cause trouble by providing support to the discontented from neighboring states, and he introduced legislation that broke the impasse between New York and Vermont. Vermonters responded favorably to the overture, publicly pushing Eli Parsons and Luke Twenty-four hour period out of the country (but quietly continuing to support others).[
citation needed

Vermont became the fourteenth state later negotiations with New York and the passage of the new constitution.[63]

Impact on the Constitution


Thomas Jefferson was serving as ambassador to France at the time and refused to be alarmed by Shays’ Rebellion. He argued in a letter to James Madison on January 30, 1787, that occasional rebellion serves to preserve freedoms. In a letter to William Stephens Smith on November xiii, 1787, Jefferson wrote, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”[64]
In contrast, George Washington had been calling for constitutional reform for many years, and he wrote in a letter dated Oct 31, 1786, to Henry Lee, “You talk, my good sir, of employing influence to appease the present tumults in Massachusetts. I know non where that influence is to be found, or, if attainable, that information technology would exist a proper remedy for the disorders. Influence is not government. Let united states of america accept a government past which our lives, liberties, and properties will be secured, or let us know the worst at once.”[65]

Influence upon the Constitutional Convention


At the fourth dimension of the rebellion, the weaknesses of the federal government as constituted under the Articles of Confederation were apparent to many. A vigorous debate was going on throughout the states on the demand for a stronger fundamental authorities, with Federalists arguing for the idea, and Anti-Federalists opposing them. Historical opinion is divided on what sort of role the rebellion played in the germination and later ratification of the The states Constitution, although almost scholars agree that it played some role, at least temporarily drawing some anti-Federalists to the stiff government side.[67]

Past early 1785, many influential merchants and political leaders were already agreed that a stronger central regime was needed. Presently subsequently Shays’ Rebellion bankrupt out, delegates from five states met in Annapolis, Maryland from September 11–fourteen, 1786, and they ended that vigorous steps were needed to reform the federal government, only they disbanded considering of a lack of full representation and authority, calling for a convention of all united states to be held in Philadelphia in May 1787.[68]
Historian Robert Feer notes that several prominent figures had hoped that the convention would fail, requiring a larger-calibration convention, and French diplomat Louis-Guillaume Otto thought that the convention was intentionally cleaved off early to reach this stop.[69]

In early 1787, John Jay wrote that the rural disturbances and the inability of the central authorities to fund troops in response made “the inefficiency of the Federal government more and more manifest”.[lxx]
Henry Knox observed that the insurgence in Massachusetts clearly influenced local leaders who had previously opposed a strong federal government. Historian David Szatmary writes that the timing of the rebellion “convinced the elites of sovereign states that the proposed gathering at Philadelphia must take place”.[71]
Some states delayed choosing delegates to the proposed convention, including Massachusetts, in part because it resembled the “actress-legal” conventions organized past the protestors before the rebellion became vehement.[72]

Influence upon the Constitution


Elbridge Gerry (1861 portrait by James Bogle) opposed the Constitution as drafted, although his reasons for doing then were not strongly influenced by the rebellion.

The convention that met in Philadelphia was dominated by strong-authorities advocates.[73]
Consul Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut argued that because the people could not be trusted (equally exemplified by Shays’ Rebellion), the members of the federal House of Representatives should exist chosen by state legislatures, not by pop vote.[74]
The instance of Shays’ Rebellion may also have been influential in the addition of language to the constitution concerning the ability of states to manage domestic violence, and their power to need the render of individuals from other states for trial.[75]

The rebellion likewise played a role in the give-and-take of the number of chief executives the United States would take going forrad. While mindful of tyranny, delegates of the Constitutional Convention thought that the single executive would be more effective in responding to national disturbances.[76]

Federalists cited the rebellion equally an example of the confederation authorities’s weaknesses, while opponents such equally Elbridge Gerry, a merchant speculator and Massachusetts delegate from Essex County, idea that a federal response to the rebellion would accept been even worse than that of the state. He was one of the few convention delegates who refused to sign the new constitution, although his reasons for doing and then did non stem from the rebellion.[77]

Influence upon ratification


When the constitution had been drafted, Massachusetts was viewed by Federalists equally a state that might non ratify it, because of widespread anti-Federalist sentiment in the rural parts of the country. Massachusetts Federalists, including Henry Knox, were active in courting swing votes in the debates leading upward to the state’s ratifying convention in 1788. When the vote was taken on February 6, 1788, representatives of rural communities involved in the rebellion voted against ratification by a broad margin, but the day was carried past a coalition of merchants, urban elites, and market place boondocks leaders. The state ratified the constitution by a vote of 187 to 168.[78]

Historians are divided on the impact the rebellion had on the ratification debates. Robert Feer notes that major Federalist pamphleteers rarely mentioned it and that some anti-Federalists used the fact that Massachusetts survived the rebellion as testify that a new constitution was unnecessary.[79]
Leonard Richards counters that publications like the
Pennsylvania Gazette
explicitly tied anti-Federalist opinion to the rebel crusade, calling opponents of the new constitution “Shaysites” and the Federalists “Washingtonians”.[eighty]

Read:   Explain How Diffusion Restored Homeostasis During the Dialysis Treatment

David Szatmary argues that argue in some states was affected, particularly in Massachusetts, where the rebellion had a polarizing effect.[81]
Richards records Henry Jackson’due south observation that opposition to ratification in Massachusetts was motivated past “that cursed spirit of insurgency”, just that broader opposition in other states originated in other constitutional concerns expressed by Elbridge Gerry, who published a widely distributed pamphlet outlining his concerns nearly the vagueness of some of the powers granted in the constitution and its lack of a Beak of Rights.[82]

The military machine powers enshrined in the constitution were before long put to use by President George Washington. Afterwards the passage past the United States Congress of the Whiskey Deed, protestation against the taxes it imposed began in western Pennsylvania. The protests escalated and Washington led federal and state militia to put down what is now known equally the Whiskey Rebellion.[83]



The events and people of the uprising are commemorated in the towns where they lived and those where events took place. Sheffield erected a memorial (pictured above) mark the site of the “last battle” on the Sheffield-Egremont Road in Sheffield, across the route from the Appalachian Trail trailhead. Pelham memorialized Daniel Shays past naming the portion of US Road 202 that runs through Pelham the Daniel Shays Highway. A statue of Full general Shepard was erected in his hometown of Westfield.[84]

In the town of Petersham, Massachusetts, a memorial was erected in 1927 by the New England Society of Brooklyn, New York in commemoration of Full general Benjamin Lincoln’s rout of the Shaysite forces there on the morning of Feb 4. The lengthy inscription is typical of the traditional, pro-authorities estimation, ending with the line, “Obedience to the law is true freedom.”[85]

See as well


  • Fries’s Rebellion
  • List of incidents of ceremonious unrest in the U.s.a.
  • Paper Money Riot
  • Tax resistance in the United States
  • Whiskey Rebellion



  1. ^

    Minot, p. 150

  2. ^

    Richards, Leonard Fifty. (2002-01-31).
    Shays’southward Rebellion. Philadelphia: Academy of Pennsylvania Press. doi:x.9783/9780812203196. ISBN9780812203196.

  3. ^

    “Shays’ Rebellion [ushistory.org]”.
    world wide web.ushistory.org.

  4. ^

    “Shays’ Rebellion”.

  5. ^

    Richards, Leonard (2003).
    Shays’south Rebellion: The American Revolution’due south Final Battle. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. ISBN978-0-8122-1870-1.

  6. ^

    Szatmary, pp. ane–x

  7. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 10–15

  8. ^

    Szatmary, p. 32

  9. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 25–31

  10. ^

    Richards, p. 85

  11. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 29–34
  12. ^



    Zinn, p. 91

  13. ^

    Hahn, John Willard (1946).
    The Background of Shays’south Rebellion: A Study of Massachusetts History, 1780–1787. Academy of Wisconsin–Madison. p. 33.

  14. ^

    Mitchell, Broadus (1957).
    Heritage from Hamilton. Columbia University Press. p. 26. ISBN9780598382382
    . Retrieved
    April 26,

  15. ^






    Zinn, p. 93

  16. ^

    Szatmary, p. 43

  17. ^

    Bacon, p. 1:148

  18. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 38–42, 45

  19. ^

    G. North

  20. ^

    Richards, pp. 87–88

  21. ^

    Richards, p. 88

  22. ^

    Richards, pp. 6–9

  23. ^

    Szatmary, p. 38
  24. ^





    Morse, p. 208

  25. ^

    Szatmary, p. 56

  26. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 79–80

  27. ^

    Szatmary, p. 80

  28. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 78–79

  29. ^

    Richards, pp. 84–87
  30. ^



    Kingdom of the netherlands, pp. 245–247

  31. ^

    Holland, p. 247

  32. ^

    Manuel, p. 219

  33. ^

    Szatmary, p. 84

  34. ^

    Szatmary, p. 92

  35. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 92–93

  36. ^

    Szatmary, p. 94

  37. ^

    Szatmary, p. 97

  38. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 84–86

  39. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 86–89, 104

  40. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 98–99

  41. ^

    Richards, pp. 27–28

  42. ^

    Holland, p. 261

  43. ^

    Richards, p. 28

  44. ^

    Szatmary, p. 101

  45. ^

    Richards, p. 29

  46. ^

    Szatmary, p. 102

  47. ^

    Szatmary, p. 103

  48. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 103–104

  49. ^

    Szatmary, p. 105

  50. ^

    Richards, pp. 31, 120

  51. ^

    Szatmary, p. 108

  52. ^

    Richards, p. 34

  53. ^

    Richards, p. 32

  54. ^

    Richards, p. 33

  55. ^

    Richards, p. 35

  56. ^

    Szatmary (p. 122) and Richards (p. 36) disagree on the casualty figures. Szatmary reports three government soldiers killed, Richards ane. Richards does not written report on the government wounded.

  57. ^

    Richards, p. 36

  58. ^

    Richards, pp. 38–41
  59. ^



    Zinn, p. 95

  60. ^

    Richards, p. 117

  61. ^

    Richards, pp. 38–39

  62. ^

    Richards, p. 119

  63. ^

    Richards, p. 122

  64. ^

    Foner, p. 219

  65. ^

    Lodge, p. 2:26

  66. ^

    Feer, p. 396

  67. ^

    Szatmary, p. 120

  68. ^

    Szatmary, p. 122

  69. ^

    Feer, pp. 391–392

  70. ^

    Szatmary, p. 123

  71. ^

    Szatmary, p. 127

  72. ^

    Feer, p. 393

  73. ^

    Richards, p. 132

  74. ^

    Richards, p. 134

  75. ^

    Szatmary, p. 130

  76. ^

    Milkis, S.; Nelson, M. (2003).
    The American Presidency
    (4th ed.). Washington: CQ Press.

  77. ^

    Feer, p. 395

  78. ^

    Szatmary, p. 133

  79. ^

    Feer, p. 404

  80. ^

    Richards, p. 139

  81. ^

    Szatmary, pp. 128–132

  82. ^

    Richards, pp. 141–143

  83. ^

    Richards, pp. 135–136

  84. ^

    Richards, pp. 117–118

  85. ^

    Peet, Richard (March 1996). “A Sign Taken for History: Daniel Shays’ Memorial in Petersham, Massachusetts”.
    Annals of the Association of American Geographers.
    (1): 21–43. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1996.tb01744.x. JSTOR 2563945.

  86. ^

    “Shays’ Rebellion – Object: Petersham Monument”.
    . Retrieved



  • Bacon, Edwin M., ed. (1896).
    Supplement to the Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts. Boston: Geo. Ellis. p. 148. OCLC 14050329. Retrieved

  • Feer, Robert (September 1969). “Shays’s Rebellion and the Constitution: A Report in Causation”.
    The New England Quarterly.
    (three): 388–410. doi:10.2307/363616. JSTOR 363616.

  • Foner, Eric (2006).
    Give Me Liberty! An American History. New York: W.W Norton. ISBN978-0-393-92782-5. OCLC 61479662.

  • Holland, Josiah Gilbert (1855).
    History of Western Massachusetts. Springfield, MA: Southward. Bowles. p. 245. OCLC 505288328.

  • Lodge, Henry Cabot (1889).
    American Statesmen: George Washington. Houghton, Mifflin. p. 26. OCLC 123204544.

  • Manuel, Frank Edward; Manuel, Fritzie Prigohzy (2004).
    James Bowdoin and the Patriot Philosophers. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Guild. ISBN978-0-87169-247-4. OCLC 231993575.

  • Morse, Anson (1909).
    The Federalist Party in Massachusetts to the Year 1800. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. OCLC 718724.

  • North, Gary (Feb ix, 2004). “John Hancock’s Big Toe and the Constitution”. LewRockwell.com. Retrieved
    21 January

  • Richards, Leonard L (2002).
    Shays’s Rebellion: The American Revolution’s Concluding Boxing. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. ISBN978-0-8122-1870-1. OCLC 56029217.

  • Swift, Esther Thou. (1969).
    Westward Springfield Massachusetts: A Boondocks History. Springfield, MA: F. A. Bassette Visitor. OCLC 69843.

  • Szatmary, David P. (1980).

    Shays’ Rebellion: The Making of an Agrarian Insurrection
    . University of Massachusetts Press. ISBN978-0-87023-419-4.

  • Zinn, Howard (2005).
    A People’s History of the United States. New York: HarperCollins. ISBN978-0-06-083865-2. OCLC 61265580.

Further reading


Additional scholarly sources
  • Beard, Charles (1935).
    An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. New York: Macmillan.

  • Gross, Robert A. “A Yankee Rebellion? The Regulators, New England, and the New Nation,”
    New England Quarterly
    (2009) 82#1 pp. 112–135 in JSTOR
  • Gross, Robert A., ed. (1993).
    In Debt to Shays: The Bicentennial of an Agrarian Rebellion. University Press of Virginia. ISBN978-0-8139-1354-4.

  • Hale, Edward Everett (1891).
    The Story of Massachusetts. Boston: D. Lothrop Company. p. 301.

  • Kaufman, Martin, ed. (1987).
    Shays’due south Rebellion: Selected Essays. Westfield, MA: Westfield Land College. OCLC 15339286.

  • McCarthy, Timothy Patrick; McMillan, John, eds. (2011).
    The Radical Reader: A Documentary History of the American Radical Tradition. New York: New Press. ISBN978-i-59558-742-8. OCLC 741491899.

    (Reprints a petition to the land legislature.)
  • Middleton, Lamar (1968) [1938].
    Revolt, United states. Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Printing. OCLC 422400.

  • Minot, George Richards (1788).
    History of the Insurrections in Massachusetts. Worcester, MA: Isaiah Thomas. p. three. OCLC 225355026.

    (The earliest account of the rebellion. Although this account was deeply unsympathetic to the rural Regulators, it became the basis for virtually subsequent tellings, including the many mentions of the rebellion in Massachusetts boondocks and state histories.)
  • Munroe, James Phinney (1915).
    New England Conscience: With Typical Examples. Boston: R. Yard. Badger. p. 89. OCLC 1113783.

  • Shattuck, Gary,
    Artful and Designing Men: The Trials of Task Shattuck and the Regulation of 1786–1787. Mustang, OK: Tate Publishing, 2013. ISBN 978-i-62746-575-5
  • Starkey, Marion Lena (1955).

    A Little Rebellion
    . New York: Knopf. OCLC 1513271.

  • Wier, Robert (2007). “Shays’ Rebellion”. In Wier, Robert (ed.).
    Grade in America: Q–Z. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN978-0-313-34245-5. OCLC 255745185.

Fictional treatments
  • Bellamy, Edward (1900).
    The Knuckles of Stockbridge: A Romance of Shays’ Rebellion. New York, Boston, and Chicago: Silver, Burdett & Co. OCLC 656929797.

    (Fictional delineation of the rebellion, as social commentary.)
  • Collier, James Lincoln; Collier, Christopher (1978).

    The Winter Hero
    . Four Winds Printing.

    (The rebellion is the central story of this children’s novel.)
  • Degenhard, William (1943).
    The Regulators. New York: The Punch Press. OCLC 1663869.

  • Martin, William (2007).

    The Lost Constitution
    . Forge Books; Reprint edition.

    (The rebellion plays a central role in this novel.)

External links


  • Shays’s Rebellion (George Washington’s Mount Vernon)
  • “To Gen Washington from Gen. Benjamin Lincoln” (a letter extensively covering the events of Shays’ Rebellion) (National Archives)

What Was the Main Factor That Led to Shays Rebellion

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays%27_Rebellion

Originally posted 2022-08-03 08:49:32.

Check Also

Which Book Citations Are Formatted Correctly Check All That Apply

By Vladimir Gjorgiev/Shutterstock Concealer is an essential part of any makeup routine. It’s many women’s …