Shays' Rebellion

A request that this article title be changed to Shays's Rebellion is under discussion. Please do not move this article until the discussion is closed.

Shays’ Rebellion
An illustration of Shays's troops repulsed from the armory in Springfield in early 1787
Date	August 29, 1786 – February 1787
Location	Western Massachusetts, United States
Caused by	Economic conflict between farmers and merchants Aggressive tax and debt collection Political corruption and cronyism
Goals	Reform of state government, later overthrow of state government
Methods	Direct action to close courthouse Attempted seizure of federal arsenal at Springfield Armory
Resulted in	Rebellion crushed Weak federal reaction helps spur Constitutional Convention
Parties
Shaysites  United States  Massachusetts State Militia Private militia
Lead figures
Daniel Shays Luke Day Eli Parsons Job Shattuck  James Bowdoin  William Shepard Benjamin Lincoln
Number
4,000+ (largest force 1,500) 4,000+ (largest force 3,000)
Casualties and losses
6 killed Dozens wounded Many arrested 2 executed by hanging 3 killed[1] Dozens wounded

Shays' Rebellion was an armed uprising in Western Massachusetts and Worcester in response to a debt crisis among the citizenry and in opposition to the state government's increased efforts to collect taxes on both individuals and their trades.^[2][3][4] The fighting took place in the areas around Springfield during 1786 and 1787. Historically, scholars have argued that the four thousand rebels, called Shaysites, who protested against economic and civil rights injustices by the Massachusetts Government were led by Revolutionary War veteran Daniel Shays. However, recent scholarship has suggested that Shays's role in the protests was significantly and strategically exaggerated by Massachusetts elites, who had a political interest in shifting blame for bad economic conditions away from themselves.^[5][6]

In 1787, the protestors marched on the federal Springfield Armory in an unsuccessful attempt to seize its weaponry and overthrow the government. The federal government, severely limited in its prerogatives under the Articles of Confederation, found itself unable to finance troops to put down the rebellion; it was consequently put down by the Massachusetts State Militia under William Shepard, alongside a privately funded local militia led by former Continental Army officer Benjamin Lincoln. The widely-held view had already developed that the Articles of Confederation were untenable and needed amending, with the events of the rebellion serving as further evidence for the later Constitutional Convention. There is continuing debate among scholars as to what extent the rebellion influenced the later drafting and ratification of the Constitution.^[7]