The United States after 1783: An American or a British Empire?

Abstract

Abstract This contribution outlines a case for reconsidering US history in the nineteenth century. The standard approach tells the “story of the nation” after 1783 from an internal standpoint that minimizes external connections. Historians of empire, however, distinguish between formal and effective independence and trace the lines of continuity that lead from one to the other. If applied to the newly decolonized United States, this perspective reveals that important ties of commerce, finance, politics, and culture with the former colonial power remained both vibrant and persistent. Some contemporaries formulated alternatives that would reduce Britain’s informal influence; others cooperated with what would later be called neocolonialism. The ensuing debate set out arguments and policies that were to be carried forward into the twentieth century. Effective independence, defined as the recovery of key aspects of sovereignty, was not achieved until the late nineteenth century, after the Civil War, and when industrialization increased the power and confidence of the newly united nation. This argument suggests that existing studies need revising to recognize that the United States was the first important decolonized state in what was becoming the modern world; as such, it was the precursor of states in other parts of the world that were to follow its lead.