Argument: Constitutional history, like constitutional law, tends to be court centered perhaps because so many people who do constitutional history are in fact lawyers who have imbued this pernicious doctrine that the Constitution is only what courts say it is, and if courts don't speak, then there's really nothing interesting to write about. This has led to systematic ignorance about the importance of constitutional development outside the courts, which has certainly been of equal significance, and arguably of greater significance, than constitutional development "inside" the judiciary. Perhaps the best example of the point is the epic saga of American expansionism, by which the United States went from a country of eleven states on April 30, 1789 to a nation of 50 states by 1956, as well as an imperial power with colonies, the most important of which is surely Puerto Rico. To put it mildly, this is a largely untold saga, much to our detriment. It is (past) time to integrate it into our standard histories (and courses) about constitutional development.