The Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11: what it says and what it does not
Last updated October 22, 2026. Not peer reviewed; see the review status.
What does Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli say?
Article 11 of the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli (Senate consent June 7, 1797) says the U.S. government “is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” It stands in the ratified English text; the Arabic text has a different passage there. It is a diplomatic assurance, not a constitutional ruling.
Why it matters. Article 11 is the most-quoted sentence on Muslims and the early republic, and often misdescribed. Knowing it stands in the English text only, and what kind of document it is, keeps a strong source from being weakened by overuse.
What does the article say?
English text, per the Yale Law School Avalon Project:
“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”
Is it in the Arabic text?
No. Modern translations show a different passage in its place: a letter from the Dey of Algiers to the Pasha of Tripoli urging him to accept the treaty. A Miami University bilingual edition describes the same placement. The Senate advised on the English text.
The sources checked do not explain how the clause entered the English version, and this site does not guess.
When was it ratified?
Avalon records Senate advice and consent on June 7, 1797 and ratification on June 10, 1797. Some secondary sources say “unanimous.” Only secondary sources support that, so this site dropped it.
What does the clause establish?
It assures a Muslim-ruled state that religious difference would not be a pretext for war. It is cited in church-state debates as an early official statement that the government is not founded on the Christian religion.
Limits: one language version of a treaty clause is not a ruling on the Constitution and religion. Its value here is as the government describing itself to Muslim counterparts in non-confessional terms.
Where do commentators disagree?
Historians discuss the English-Arabic divergence; the sources checked do not settle it. The First Amendment Encyclopedia (MTSU) places the treaty in debates over religion and the state. Any argument built on Article 11 rests on the English text alone, and this site says so.
Scholarly conversation
- Avalon Project, Yale Law School: Treaty of Peace and Friendship, 1796Prints the English text, the Arabic original, and ratification dates.
- First Amendment Encyclopedia (MTSU): Treaty of TripoliPlaces the clause in debates over religion and the state.
- Miami University, bilingual edition of the 1796 treatyPrints Arabic and English together and notes the letter in Article 11's position.
What remains open
- How the religion clause entered the English text and not the Arabic.
- How much weight a treaty assurance carries as evidence of domestic character.
- Whether a primary account of the drafting survives.
Further reading for specialists
- Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli (1796), Avalon Project, Yale Law School.
- First Amendment Encyclopedia (MTSU), “Treaty of Tripoli.”
Sources checked
Related on this site
Cite as: Threads of Connection, “The Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11: what it says and what it does not,” usmuslim.org/ideas/treaty-of-tripoli-article-11, last updated October 22, 2026. Content licensed CC BY 4.0.