Before Hegemony:Adam Smith, American Independence,and the Origins of the First Era of Globalization James Ashley Morrison Abstract While extensive scholarship has shown that it is possible to maintain global economic openness after hegemony,economic liberalization is still thought to be unlikely prior to hegemonic ascent.This assumption is based on the conven- tional narrative that Great Britain began lowering its trade barriers in the 1820s as it began its hegemonic ascent.This article shows that Britain began pursuing an open trading structure in the 1780s-in precisely the multipolar world that heg- emonic stability theorists claimed would be least likely to initiate the shift.This change in commercial strategy depended crucially on the intellectual conversion of a key policymaker-the Earl of Shelburne-from mercantilist foreign economic pol- icy to Adam Smith's revolutionary laissez-faire liberalism.Using the case of "the world's most important trading state"in the nineteenth century,this article high- lights the importance of intellectuals-as well as their ideas-in shaping states'for- eign policy strategies.It also provides further evidence of key individuals'significance and their decisions at"critical junctures." I owe to a journey I made with Mr.Smith from Edinburgh to London the difference between light and darkness...The novelty of his principles .. made me unable to comprehend them at the time,but he urged them with so much...eloquence,that they took a certain hold which,though it did not... arrive at full conviction for some few years after,I can truly say has consti- tuted ever since the happiness of my life. -The Earl of Shelburne,Prime Minister(1782-83) I am indebted to Douglas Irwin,Cheryl Schonhardt-Bailey,Jack Rakove,Judith Goldstein,Barry Weingast,Richard Boyd,David Steinberg,Jonathan Herzog,Margaret Peters,James Fearon,David Stasavage,Patrick Leblond,Craig Murphy,David Hancock,Moonhawk Kim,Kristina Johnson,Jeff Colgan,and Molly Roberts.I am also grateful to my colleagues at Middlebury College and the par- ticipants in the NEPSA,IPES,and ISA meetings.I also thank the editors and reviewers of this journal for their invaluable suggestions. International Organization 66,Summer 2012,pp.395-428 2012 by The IO Foundation. do:10.1017/S0020818312000148Before Hegemony: Adam Smith, American Independence, and the Origins of the First Era of Globalization James Ashley Morrison Abstract While extensive scholarship has shown that it is possible to maintain global economic openness after hegemony, economic liberalization is still thought to be unlikely prior to hegemonic ascent+ This assumption is based on the conven￾tional narrative that Great Britain began lowering its trade barriers in the 1820s as it began its hegemonic ascent+ This article shows that Britain began pursuing an open trading structure in the 1780s—in precisely the multipolar world that heg￾emonic stability theorists claimed would be least likely to initiate the shift+ This change in commercial strategy depended crucially on the intellectual conversion of a key policymaker—the Earl of Shelburne—from mercantilist foreign economic pol￾icy to Adam Smith’s revolutionary laissez-faire liberalism+ Using the case of “the world’s most important trading state” in the nineteenth century, this article high￾lights the importance of intellectuals—as well as their ideas—in shaping states’ for￾eign policy strategies+ It also provides further evidence of key individuals’ significance and their decisions at “critical junctures+” I owe to a journey I made with Mr+ Smith from Edinburgh to London the difference between light and darkness +++ The novelty of his principles +++ made me unable to comprehend them at the time, but he urged them with so much +++ eloquence, that they took a certain hold which, though it did not +++ arrive at full conviction for some few years after, I can truly say has consti￾tuted ever since the happiness of my life+ —The Earl of Shelburne, Prime Minister ~1782–83! I am indebted to Douglas Irwin, Cheryl Schonhardt-Bailey, Jack Rakove, Judith Goldstein, Barry Weingast, Richard Boyd, David Steinberg, Jonathan Herzog, Margaret Peters, James Fearon, David Stasavage, Patrick Leblond, Craig Murphy, David Hancock, Moonhawk Kim, Kristina Johnson, Jeff Colgan, and Molly Roberts+ I am also grateful to my colleagues at Middlebury College and the par￾ticipants in the NEPSA, IPES, and ISA meetings+ I also thank the editors and reviewers of this journal for their invaluable suggestions+ International Organization 66, Summer 2012, pp+ 395–428 © 2012 by The IO Foundation+ doi:10+10170S0020818312000148