This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Pennsylvania High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. U.S. Congress Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is about one (or many) event(s). Philadelphia High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Government High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance). United States History High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject United States HistoryTemplate:WikiProject United States HistoryUnited States History articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject United States History To-do: history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : United States History articles needing attention Infobox : United States History articles needing infoboxes Stubs : Stub-Class United States History articles, Category:United States history stubs Other : Place either of the following WikiProject banners on United States History-related articles and assess: {{ WikiProject United States History|class=|importance=}} {{ WikiProject United States|class=|importance=|UShistory=Yes|UShistory-importance=}}

Archives

Archive 1

How about a list of delegates? For example, I took a guess and looked up James Mitchell Varnum and discovered that he was the delegate from Rhode Island from 1780-1782 and 1786-1787. I suspect that much of this information exists on Wikipedia, but is not organized to be included in this article. 38.121.138.113 ( talk) 17:22, 13 January 2012 (UTC) reply

See [1] Tom (North Shoreman) ( talk) 19:57, 13 January 2012 (UTC) reply

As the terms Continental Congress and Confederation Congress are used interchangeably by some, perhaps a section or simply a link to the Confederation Congress page should be included? -Daniel T — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.115.123.19 ( talk) 18:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC) reply

We may want to mention all three incarnations in the lede, and mention the third was the governing body under the Articles of Confederation. Bms4880 ( talk) 21:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC) reply

The organization of the Congress is not described. There is a debate over whether the traditional or conventional wisdom view that the weak Congress was a failure, or the flexible Congress was a success, due to its organization. A section describing the organization of the institution, and its processes, would put the more detailed history and timeline in context. Both views should be presented. Harrycroswell ( talk) 07:57, 14 November 2013 (UTC) reply

The last paragraph of the Legacy section rather grandiosely interprets the opening line of the Gettysburg Address ("Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.") as a paean in praise of the Continental Congress for establishing the United States. The paragraph doesn't have any citation, and by assuming that by "our fathers" Lincoln meant only "the members of the Continental Congress", it relies on an extremely narrow and counterintuitive reading of the text that I don't think very many readers would arrive at naturally. Lincoln praises "our fathers" for bringing forth a new nation, not for the narrower acts of drafting and signing the Declaration of Independence, coordinating and supplying the Continental Army, and conducting foreign diplomacy. As such it seems pretty clear that Lincoln is praising the Spirit of '76 as a whole, and that by "our fathers" he includes not just the few dozen men who served in the Continental Congress during the war, but also the thousands of men and women who served in the Continental Army, the Continental Navy, the fourteen state governments, and who served the Revolutionary cause outside any institutional hierarchy. The author of the paragraph even seems to know what a stretch this reading is, as they specify that Lincoln's praise for the Continental Congress is only "by implication". Unless a citation can be found indicating that historians tie the Gettysburg Address specifically to the Continental Congress, I think the paragraph is a clear instance of WP:SYNTH. Binabik80 ( talk) 16:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC) reply

I think all commentators on Lincoln say he had reference to the Declaration, which is is not a synthesis to say it was a product of the Contl Congress. They also count 13 states not 14. Rjensen ( talk) 05:27, 17 December 2014 (UTC) reply

I don't see any implication in the Gettysburg Address. The date is straightforward. The foundation of the U.S. is generally agreed to be in 1776 because of the Declaration of Independence. The Congress was the body that promulgated the Declaration but it itself did not constitute the foundation. This paragraph seems clearly subjective opinion, mind-reading (of Lincoln), or at best original research (but I don't see how it's credible research). Can it be backed up by any citation? Pending a citation I am removing the paragraph to here:

Whether it was successful as an organizational culture, or a failure when judged as a modern institution, the men, and by implication, the Continental Congress, were praised by a later President, whose words may serve as a balance to Madison's. President Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863, summed up their core accomplishment in thirty words: "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaslav ( talk • contribs) 02:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Does anyone know why the link to volume 14 is no good? Also, according to the Library of Congress website, there were 34 - not 33 - volumes published. Where is number 34? Elsquared ( talk) 05:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC) reply

Currently the article reads, "The Declaration of Independence was issued two days later declaring themselves a new nation: the United States of America." However, most Americans of the day, both within and without the Continental Congress, considered their State to be their country and the United States to be little more than a military alliance of thirteen separate nations. The Declaration itself reads, "That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States..." The title further reads, "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America." Note the lower case in "united," indicating that it was not the title of a nation. It was not until the Articles of Confederation were drafted that "United States of America" was adopted as the, " Stile of this Confederacy." It was only gradually over time, particularly after the adoption of the Constitution, that people began to see the U.S. as a single nation, particularly after the War of 1812 and the Civil War. Perhaps the line in the article should be shortened to, "The Declaration of Independence was issued two days later," to acknowledge that many delegates at the time thought they were creating thirteen nations, not one. Emperor001 ( talk) 20:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC) reply

I'd think that United Colonies, per accuracy, should be placed in the first sentence, but exactly how didn't come to me on a brief look. Thoughts or ruminations? A ping and a thank you to its creator, Rjensen. Randy Kryn ( talk) 03:11, 23 August 2022 (UTC) reply