In May 1787, in an atmosphere of crisis, delegates met in Philadelphia to design a radically new form of government. Distinguished historian Richard Beeman captures as never before the dynamic of the debate and the characters of the men who labored that historic summer. Virtually all of the issues in dispute—the extent of presidential power, the nature of federalism, and, most explosive of all, the role of slavery—have continued to provoke conflict throughout our nation's history. This unprecedented book takes readers behind the scenes to show how the world's most enduring constitution was forged through conflict, compromise, and fragile consensus. As Gouverneur Morris, delegate of Pennsylvania, noted: "While some have boasted it as a work from Heaven, others have given it a less righteous origin. I have many reasons to believe that it is the work of plain, honest men."
Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Browse our Bookshelf Favorites store for big savings on popular fiction, nonfiction, children's books, and more. |
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
Starred Review. A day-by-day account of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia can't yield up much drama or fireworks, or even much sparkling talk, at least as recorded by a few participants, especially James Madison. But in this masterful account, Beeman (Patrick Henry), a noted historian of the late 18th century, does his best to dramatize the writing of the American Constitution. As the convention's hot summer weeks rolled on, tensions built, agreements were reached and compromises (especially, alas, about slavery) were made. Beeman gives each decision, each vote, the weight it deserves and, in brief sketches, brings the delegates alive. The result may not be an exciting story, but, after all, it concerns the writing of the world's longest-lived written national constitution. It's also a story freighted with world-historical significance—and one as well told here as can be imagined. This account is now the most authoritative, up-to-date treatment of the Constitutional Convention since Catherine Drinker Bowen's Miracle at Philadelphia over 40 years ago. It's unlikely to be surpassed. Illus., map. (Mar. 17)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
From Bookmarks Magazine
The challenge of writing an account of the Constitutional Convention is that so many accounts already exist. “Do we need another narrative history of the Constitutional Convention of 1787?” asks the Washington Post. While Beeman’s book does not revolutionize the genre, it garners praise for examining the “the nuances and complexities of the compromises that the framers made” (New York Times) and for its detailed recreation of the Philadelphia debates. The most pointed complaint comes from Walter Isaacson in his otherwise positive New York Times review. He writes of Beeman’s hesitancy to include too much of his own interpretation in the book: “[S]ince he is in a far better position to make an assessment than we are, it would be nice to know what he believes.”
Copyright 2009 Bookmarks Publishing LLC --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Copyright 2009 Bookmarks Publishing LLC --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
68 of 75 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
If there are two things I would recommend reading this summer they are, in order, Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution and then The Constitution of the United States. We take the Constitution for granted probably more than any other document that I know of.
In Plain, Honest Men, Richard Beeman gives the reader a glimpse of the process that produced one of the most beloved documents in the world. If beloved, it is equally misunderstood, misquoted, and misused. While Beeman's book won't prevent the various ills associated with the Constitution, and it won't make Constitutional scholars of us, it will provide an eye opening account of its creation and the personalities of the men who created it. I found Plain, Honest Men to be one of the best books I've read in the last couple of years. Yes, in places it is a page turner.
I also now understand some of the debates over issues like ownership of guns. As much as I am grateful for the existence of the Constitution, it is not a perfect document. Witness the current debates over the issue of gun control, or the separation of church and state. Can you have too much freedom of speech? All of these questions are debated now because of the contents of the Constitution we have. If those issues are confusing to us, the shocker is that they were confusing to the writers of the Constitution. There was very little agreement then on any of the issues. The Constitution we have is a creation of compromise. Understanding what Beeman conveys won't make these issues any clearer, but it will clarify the monumental event that the Constitution's creation was and is. Beeman also provides unique glimpses into the personalities like Robert Morris, George Washington, and James Madison and how they each helped to shape the document we have.
Americans should read Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution. When you're finished, read the real document.
Peace to all.
In Plain, Honest Men, Richard Beeman gives the reader a glimpse of the process that produced one of the most beloved documents in the world. If beloved, it is equally misunderstood, misquoted, and misused. While Beeman's book won't prevent the various ills associated with the Constitution, and it won't make Constitutional scholars of us, it will provide an eye opening account of its creation and the personalities of the men who created it. I found Plain, Honest Men to be one of the best books I've read in the last couple of years. Yes, in places it is a page turner.
I also now understand some of the debates over issues like ownership of guns. As much as I am grateful for the existence of the Constitution, it is not a perfect document. Witness the current debates over the issue of gun control, or the separation of church and state. Can you have too much freedom of speech? All of these questions are debated now because of the contents of the Constitution we have. If those issues are confusing to us, the shocker is that they were confusing to the writers of the Constitution. There was very little agreement then on any of the issues. The Constitution we have is a creation of compromise. Understanding what Beeman conveys won't make these issues any clearer, but it will clarify the monumental event that the Constitution's creation was and is. Beeman also provides unique glimpses into the personalities like Robert Morris, George Washington, and James Madison and how they each helped to shape the document we have.
Americans should read Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution. When you're finished, read the real document.
Peace to all.
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful
By R. Moore
Format:Hardcover
Beeman is a highly respected scholar and expert on the Constitution, the Convention during which it was drafted, and the intellectual foundations of the document.
This popular, but also scholarly, treatment of the Constitutional Convention is thorough, balanced, and should be on the reading list of anyone who wants to really understand what went on during the three-month-long convention in Philadelphia. The proceedings of the Convention were not well documented (James Madison's amazing journal is the only comprehensive account; there is no other comparable source [least of all the official secretary's sketchy notes], and in many cases there are not corroborating reports that would enable verification of accounts. Hence, "what went on" is often open to interpretation, both as to the intent of the speaker/interest group and as to the precise content.
Given those persistent challenges, Beeman is scrupulously fair in fully describing both what is known, and in most instances to convey the factors that qualify or prevent firm conclusions as to meaning or intent. More than this, no historian should be expected to investigate and convey.
Others have given this book three stars, and have claimed that they find in it bias and apologies for "judicial activism." I find nothing of the sort, and such qualified approval simply reveals a tendency to seek "political correctness" (as defined by the reviewer) in the text.
Beeman's treatment is first-rate, reliable, even-handed, and will help readers to understand that ALL points of view were vigorously and fully shared during the convention. Any other characterization of this book is, in my opinion, based not on fact but on uninformed opinion.
I fully enjoyed this book as part of my reading program on the Constitution, and recommend it without reservation to the thoughtful inquirer.
This popular, but also scholarly, treatment of the Constitutional Convention is thorough, balanced, and should be on the reading list of anyone who wants to really understand what went on during the three-month-long convention in Philadelphia. The proceedings of the Convention were not well documented (James Madison's amazing journal is the only comprehensive account; there is no other comparable source [least of all the official secretary's sketchy notes], and in many cases there are not corroborating reports that would enable verification of accounts. Hence, "what went on" is often open to interpretation, both as to the intent of the speaker/interest group and as to the precise content.
Given those persistent challenges, Beeman is scrupulously fair in fully describing both what is known, and in most instances to convey the factors that qualify or prevent firm conclusions as to meaning or intent. More than this, no historian should be expected to investigate and convey.
Others have given this book three stars, and have claimed that they find in it bias and apologies for "judicial activism." I find nothing of the sort, and such qualified approval simply reveals a tendency to seek "political correctness" (as defined by the reviewer) in the text.
Beeman's treatment is first-rate, reliable, even-handed, and will help readers to understand that ALL points of view were vigorously and fully shared during the convention. Any other characterization of this book is, in my opinion, based not on fact but on uninformed opinion.
I fully enjoyed this book as part of my reading program on the Constitution, and recommend it without reservation to the thoughtful inquirer.
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
There have been some excellent books written on the US Constitutional convention held in the summer of 1787. Three come to mind immediately: Catherine Drinker Bowen's MIRACLE AT PHILADELPHIA, 1966; Christopher Collier's DECISION IN PHILADELPHIA, 1986; and the more recent THE SUMMER OF 1787 by David O. Stewart, 2007. This book yields nothing to any of them in its insight into the entire process of creating the Constitution. It is a highly readable, step-by-step account of the many issues that arose from the very start of the convention and the often very drawn out efforts to resolve the complications. The author skillfully captures the personalities, concerns, and contributions of a great number of the delegates as they struggled to keep the convention on track and construct the Constitution.
As the author notes, the Articles of Confederation was little more than a "league" of sovereign states, who after the Revolutionary War had very little incentive to cooperate. But many of the leading citizens of these states were quite worried about the states' vulnerabilities to a variety of threats, both foreign and domestic, including their own state legislatures which were, in their view, too democratic. It was a real dilemma: how to create a stronger central government while respecting the sovereignty of the states.
James Madison of Virginia was by the far the leading advocate for a constitutional convention to resolve these weaknesses. In fact, he got a jump on all other attendees by proposing a new, powerful national government in his fifteen point Virginia Plan, which was the starting point for debate in the convention. All through June and July of 1787 that debate between the nationalists (Gouverneur Morris, James Wilson, Madison, etc) and states' rights delegates from Delaware, New Jersey, New York, among others, was primarily over the structuring of Congress and how the two houses would be filled. It was quite difficult for the delegates to truly appreciate that for Madison ultimate sovereignty for this new nation lay with "the People," not the states. And to this day, it is still not understood by state-righters.
The next biggest issue to resolve was the relative amount of power to be held by Congress or the chief executive. Given the fear of any sort of king-like executive, it took a great deal of persuasion to create an executive with enough power to be effective. Beyond the structure of the Congress and the Presidency, the social fact of slavery was a huge factor in virtually all of the convention compromises. There is absolutely no doubt that the South obtained many concessions from the other states regarding their "peculiar species of property."
"Plain" men could have never accomplished what these highly educated, well-placed fifty-five men did. They had the intellectual ability and resoluteness to make trade-offs among many factors and interests. Dealing with the most contentious matters, most certainly, the creation of a Senate with equal state representation and the accommodation of the Southern way of life, literally prevented a collapse of the entire proceedings. But the last issue came with high costs. Clearly, racism was a fact of life in the 18th century, but the biggest mistake of the convention, according to the author, was allowing for the importation of over 200 thousand Africans over the next twenty years before it was constitutionally banned. The resulting increased political and economic power of the South led inevitably to the Civil War.
As the author notes, the Constitution as of September 17, 1787, was no more than a document of intention, only a framework for a nation and a government. Even ratification was not a foregone conclusion. The author credits Washington with breathing life into the Constitution. It was his administration that set the precedent for so much that remains in present day government. He also notes the tremendous controversy in the first twelve years of our government between the Federalists, that is, Hamilton, and the Republicans, Madison and Jefferson, some of which was based on different interpretations of the Constitution.
The notion of "original intent" naturally arises in any discussion about the creation of the Constitution. It is quite clear that there were many intents that were fused in the making of the Constitution and most certainly reflected the thinking of the current times. It is equally clear that it was in part a flawed document. Certainly, its concessions to slavery put the nation on a course to Civil War. And several constitutional crises have resulted from its ambiguity in its stipulations for selecting presidents. Having said that, the author holds that the Constitution deserves veneration as an extraordinary document, but those feelings should not prevent us from properly addressing the tremendous changes in our society that place many of our principles concerning freedom and equality for every man in some jeopardy.
At this point, this book is probably the best on the constitutional convention.
As the author notes, the Articles of Confederation was little more than a "league" of sovereign states, who after the Revolutionary War had very little incentive to cooperate. But many of the leading citizens of these states were quite worried about the states' vulnerabilities to a variety of threats, both foreign and domestic, including their own state legislatures which were, in their view, too democratic. It was a real dilemma: how to create a stronger central government while respecting the sovereignty of the states.
James Madison of Virginia was by the far the leading advocate for a constitutional convention to resolve these weaknesses. In fact, he got a jump on all other attendees by proposing a new, powerful national government in his fifteen point Virginia Plan, which was the starting point for debate in the convention. All through June and July of 1787 that debate between the nationalists (Gouverneur Morris, James Wilson, Madison, etc) and states' rights delegates from Delaware, New Jersey, New York, among others, was primarily over the structuring of Congress and how the two houses would be filled. It was quite difficult for the delegates to truly appreciate that for Madison ultimate sovereignty for this new nation lay with "the People," not the states. And to this day, it is still not understood by state-righters.
The next biggest issue to resolve was the relative amount of power to be held by Congress or the chief executive. Given the fear of any sort of king-like executive, it took a great deal of persuasion to create an executive with enough power to be effective. Beyond the structure of the Congress and the Presidency, the social fact of slavery was a huge factor in virtually all of the convention compromises. There is absolutely no doubt that the South obtained many concessions from the other states regarding their "peculiar species of property."
"Plain" men could have never accomplished what these highly educated, well-placed fifty-five men did. They had the intellectual ability and resoluteness to make trade-offs among many factors and interests. Dealing with the most contentious matters, most certainly, the creation of a Senate with equal state representation and the accommodation of the Southern way of life, literally prevented a collapse of the entire proceedings. But the last issue came with high costs. Clearly, racism was a fact of life in the 18th century, but the biggest mistake of the convention, according to the author, was allowing for the importation of over 200 thousand Africans over the next twenty years before it was constitutionally banned. The resulting increased political and economic power of the South led inevitably to the Civil War.
As the author notes, the Constitution as of September 17, 1787, was no more than a document of intention, only a framework for a nation and a government. Even ratification was not a foregone conclusion. The author credits Washington with breathing life into the Constitution. It was his administration that set the precedent for so much that remains in present day government. He also notes the tremendous controversy in the first twelve years of our government between the Federalists, that is, Hamilton, and the Republicans, Madison and Jefferson, some of which was based on different interpretations of the Constitution.
The notion of "original intent" naturally arises in any discussion about the creation of the Constitution. It is quite clear that there were many intents that were fused in the making of the Constitution and most certainly reflected the thinking of the current times. It is equally clear that it was in part a flawed document. Certainly, its concessions to slavery put the nation on a course to Civil War. And several constitutional crises have resulted from its ambiguity in its stipulations for selecting presidents. Having said that, the author holds that the Constitution deserves veneration as an extraordinary document, but those feelings should not prevent us from properly addressing the tremendous changes in our society that place many of our principles concerning freedom and equality for every man in some jeopardy.
At this point, this book is probably the best on the constitutional convention.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
Wonderfully written look at an important piece of history!
I really enjoyed Mr. Beeman's book. I felt like I was in the room with the Founders. I enjoyed his writing style that made a potentially dry subject extremely interesting and... Read more
Published 13 days ago by CO507
4.0 out of 5 stars
Perhaps the Best Book about the Constitutional Convention of 1787
Great narrative. Great look at the more important individuals that shaped the US Constitution. Better narrative and more in depth than David O. Stewart's "Summer of 1787".
Published 2 months ago by Kenneth C. Weafer
4.0 out of 5 stars
Wish the Founding Father's had kept better notes!
This is a great book to get some insight to what it took to craft the constitution, at a time when many believed the confederation was JUST fine. Read more
Published 2 months ago by R. Roger Wheat
5.0 out of 5 stars
Plain, Honest Men
This book makes clear how the framing of the Constitution during the Convention of 1787 (May 25th - September 17th) was focused on the strong disagreements among the State... Read more
Published 4 months ago by Sam Adams
5.0 out of 5 stars
A book that tells a good story, as well as conveying important...
Do NOT make the mistake of thinking that because this book is political, it must be boring. Sure, you read or hear about politics every day in the news, and it becomes redundant. Read more
Published 5 months ago by Solipso
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent Read
A good book for all Americans and those interested in our political system. A look at the men and the issues that brought about the American Constitution at the convention of 1787... Read more
Published 5 months ago by Jonathan Gilchrist
5.0 out of 5 stars
Enjoyable and Thorough
After getting about 50% of the way through, I am extremely happy with this book. Despite its length, it has been a pretty fast and compelling read. Read more
Published 5 months ago by Scarlet O Harry
5.0 out of 5 stars
Honest Men, dut definitely not Plain
Not a Patterson novel but well worth the read. You'll need more than 3 days to get through this one but you won't be disappointed! Read more
Published 10 months ago by Mark J. Barton
5.0 out of 5 stars
Plain Honest Men
This book blows all the so called "originalists" away. The book is a detailed description of the happenings in Philadelphia when the Constitution was drafted. Read more
Published 11 months ago by Buckmaster
5.0 out of 5 stars
A History Education at age 84
I wish this author had been my History Teacher in school, now at age 84 I am being educated on a subject matter that has been grossly neglected in my education. Read more
Published 13 months ago by Gerald D. Cartwright
