In 1964 the Mississippi Valley Historical Review, published by the Organization of American Historians, became The Journal of American History. The change in title reflected not only an awareness of a growing national membership in the Association, but recognized a decided shift in contributor emphasis from regional to nationally-oriented history. The Journal of American History remains the leading scholarly publication and journal of record in the field of American history and is well known as the major resource for the study, investigation, and teaching of our country's heritage. Published quarterly in March, June, September and December, the Journal continues its distinguished career by publishing prize-winning and widely reprinted articles on American history. Each volume contains interpretive essays on all aspects of American history, plus reviews of books, films, movies, television programs, museum exhibits and resource guides, as well as microform, oral history, archive and manuscript collections, bibliographies of scholarship contained in recent scholarly periodicals and dissertations.

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. OUP is the world's largest university press with the widest global presence. It currently publishes more than 6,000 new publications a year, has offices in around fifty countries, and employs more than 5,500 people worldwide. It has become familiar to millions through a diverse publishing program that includes scholarly works in all academic disciplines, bibles, music, school and college textbooks, business books, dictionaries and reference books, and academic journals.

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
The Journal of American History © 1965 Organization of American Historians
Request Permissions