| Print List Price: | $19.00 |
| Kindle Price: | $10.99 Save $8.01 (42%) |
| Sold by: | Random House LLC Price set by seller. |
Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
The Constitutional Convention: A Narrative History from the Notes of James Madison (Modern Library Classics) Kindle Edition
| Price | New from | Used from |
- Kindle
$10.99 Read with Our Free App - Paperback
$12.99 - $13.5940 Used from $1.99 21 New from $9.19
- ISBN-13978-0812975178
- PublisherModern Library
- Publication dateApril 6, 2011
- LanguageEnglish
- File size388 KB
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
From Booklist
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.
About the Author
Michael Winship, a specialist in early American history, is professor of history at the University of Georgia. He is the author of numerous books and articles. --This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.
Product details
- ASIN : B004T3DKP6
- Publisher : Modern Library (April 6, 2011)
- Publication date : April 6, 2011
- Language : English
- File size : 388 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Not Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
- Print length : 248 pages
- Best Sellers Rank: #700,529 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- #121 in Constitutions (Kindle Store)
- #236 in Constitutional Law (Kindle Store)
- #503 in Constitutions (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the authors

James Madison, Jr. (March 16, [O.S. March 5] 1751 – June 28, 1836) was a political theorist, American statesman, and served as the fourth President of the United States (1809–17). He is hailed as the "Father of the Constitution" for his pivotal role in drafting and promoting the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Madison inherited his plantation Montpelier in Virginia and owned hundreds of slaves during his lifetime. He served as both a member of the Virginia House of Delegates and as a member of the Continental Congress prior to the Constitutional Convention. After the Convention, he became one of the leaders in the movement to ratify it, both nationally and in Virginia. His collaboration with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay produced The Federalist Papers, among the most important treatises in support of the Constitution. Madison changed his political views during his life. During deliberations on the constitution, he favored a strong national government, but later preferred stronger state governments, before settling between the two extremes late in his life.
In 1789, Madison became a leader in the new House of Representatives, drafting many basic laws. He is noted for drafting the first ten amendments to the Constitution, and thus is known also as the "Father of the Bill of Rights". He worked closely with President George Washington to organize the new federal government. Breaking with Hamilton and the Federalist Party in 1791, he and Thomas Jefferson organized the Democratic-Republican Party. In response to the Alien and Sedition Acts, Jefferson and Madison drafted the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions arguing that states can nullify unconstitutional laws.
As Jefferson's Secretary of State (1801–09), Madison supervised the Louisiana Purchase, which doubled the nation's size. Madison succeeded Jefferson as President in 1809, was re-elected in 1813, and presided over renewed prosperity for several years. After the failure of diplomatic protests and a trade embargo against the United Kingdom, he led the U.S. into the War of 1812. The war was an administrative morass, as the United States had neither a strong army nor financial system. As a result, Madison afterward supported a stronger national government and a strong military, as well as the national bank, which he had long opposed.
Bio from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Photo by John Vanderlyn (1775–1852) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

Edward J. Larson is the author of seven books and the recipient of the 1998 Pulitzer Prize in History for his book Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion. His other books include Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory; Evolution's Workshop; God and Science on the Galapagos Islands; and Trial and Error: The American Controversy Over Creation and Evolution. Larson has also written over one hundred articles, most of which address topics of law, science, or politics from an historical perspective, which have appeared in such varied journals as The Atlantic, Nature, Scientific American, The Nation, The Wilson Quarterly, and Virginia Law Review. He is a professor of history and law at Pepperdine University and lives in Georgia and California.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviewed in the United States on May 12, 2020
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
I came away from the book with several notable impressions. The strongest was that the men who attended the Constitutional Convention were hardly all geniuses, or even extraordinary statesmen for that matter. Gunning Bedford, Jr. and Jacob Broom of Delaware are examples. Bedford made the point that either the individual states or the national government could be sovereign, but not both. He was apparently unable to wrap his mind around the idea of federalism, where there are sovereigns within a sovereign. This is, of course, precisely the kind of system the Constitution established. Mr. Broom's participation was even less spectacular. He was a merchant and surveyor, who contributed only minimally to the Convention by seconding a motion. To both men's credit, they remained to the end of the Convention, which lasted almost four months, and signed the document that was ultimately crafted there.
As you might guess, there was at least one delegate, William Blount of North Carolina, who was too busy trying to fill his own pockets to spend much time dedicated to fashioning a new nation. He was a liar and cheat, who was an atrocious scoundrel and the subject of the first impeachment trial ever conducted under the new Constitution. Larson and Winship do not mention him in their book, probably because he contributed nothing to the Convention's proceedings. He seems to have been cut from the same moral fabric as Aaron Burr, although fortunately not even approximating the latter's political success (Burr was almost elected President in 1800!).
When reflecting upon the founders, one's mind tends to rest upon stellar figures such as Washington, Madison, Franklin, and Hamilton. Washington addressed the Convention only once, but his presence there insured its success. He was a heroic figure, whose immense honor and prestige held the at-times tense and chaotic Convention together. Madison was an erudite student of political theory, a mastermind who had prepared diligently for the Convention, sat up front so that he could hear clearly each and every speaker, took meticulous notes, and contributed enormous knowledge and wisdom to the effort. Franklin was the oldest delegate, but possessed enormous notoriety the world over. Another delegate wrote of him, "He is no speaker, nor does he seem to let politics engage his attention. He is, however, a most extraordinary man, and tells a story in a style more engaging than anything I ever heard . . . .[and] . . . possesses an activity of mind equal to a youth of twenty-five years of age." Hamilton was a vain and temperamental intellectual virtuoso, whose strong and unbalanced nationalist fervor turned off his fellow-delegates. Yet his observations and arguments were vibrant both in the Convention and, later, in the ratification effort.
Also, not to be ignored were lesser known, but nonetheless brilliant men. James Wilson of Pennsylvania, George Mason and Edmund Randolph of Virginia, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, as well as a host of others, gave nobly of themselves at the Convention. Not to be overlooked in this category was Luther Martin of Maryland, a gifted attorney, who provoked much thought and provided much valuable insight to the Convention, although he was a nasty-tempered, slovenly, disgusting alcoholic. It is interesting that Gerry, Mason, Randolph, and Martin refused to sign the Constitution they were instrumental in producing. Mason and Martin even worked against its ratification.
There were two genuinely unsung heroes at the Convention, Roger Sherman of Connecticut and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina. Sherman was a quite practical, prudent, and levelheaded individual, who was once introduced by Thomas Jefferson as a man who "never said a foolish thing in his life." This Connecticut delegate likewise keenly understood the art of compromise. His greatest contribution was the "Great (Connecticut) Compromise," which proposed that membership in the lower house of Congress be based upon proportional representation, while each state in the upper house have the same number of representatives. The Convention, it is safe to say, would have imploded without the benefit of Sherman's steady hand and of this compromise in particular.
Pinckney, on the contrary, who was a bubbling fountain of ideas, supplied the terms "President," "House," and "Senate." He advanced many other winning suggestions as well, such as (1) that the legislature be bicameral; (2) that it have the power to coin money, call up the militia, and establish post offices; (4) that the presidency consist of a vigorous, single-person executive; (5) that he direct the military as its commander-in-chief; (6) that he present an annual State of the Union address; and (7) that the judiciary be appointed. This South Carolinian did not receive a full and positive review in Madison's notes on the Convention, probably because the two men did not have the best personal relationship and even later became political adversaries, running against each other for the presidency.
It amazes me that all these eighteenth century framers, who were in numerous respects a diverse group, managed to overcome the many adversities of their situation and to work together for months to produce a magnificent document of liberty and limited government. Their deliberations were, for the most part, conversationally civil, intellectually candid and insightful, and unmistakably calculated to American interests. Compare these principled and dignified qualities to what we see in government at the present time - a chief executive who unilaterally modifies statutes or refuses to enforce them as he pleases, a Congress that is gridlocked, uncivil, and self-serving, and an unelected and unaccountable judiciary that peckishly legislates on important cultural issues.
On the last day of the Convention, the 81-year old Benjamin Franklin arose to his feet and spoke to the Convention. He stated that the Constitution was not entirely to his liking, but that he was supporting it and would continue to do so. He predicted, in a way that now sends shivers up the spine, that the government created by the document "is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other." Has our nation reached the point that old Ben described? Each reader may be the judge.
Top reviews from other countries
The surprising fact for me was that the Philadelphia Convention was originally called only to amend the Articles of Confederation in order to reinforce the unified executive power given and created by the separated colonies. Therefore, making an entirely new constitution was, strictly speaking, above the authority of the convention itself. Although one delegate pointed out this critical fact, it didn’t stay on the table of argument even for a short while.
How do you think about this procedural illegality? Was it a trivial thing or a grave flaw in the history of the United States - the Gesellschaft which established the principle of DUE PROCESS by none other than the Constitution itself?
Well, I believe the latter is true. What about you?







