Scan barcode
rc90041's review against another edition
5.0
Sweeping, lucid, and magnificent, but not for the faint of heart. I read every page of this 615-page behemoth, and I feel like I deserve a cookie. This is an intellectual history of the evolution of the ideas that were debated and thrown into the blender of the Constitutional Convention. Why is there a Senate? Is the Senate meant to be a body populated by a natural aristocracy of the propertied and talented? Why isn't there just one legislative body? How can one generation of "the People" bind future generations? Who makes up "the People"? Why can't legislatures just amend the Constitution? What is the supra-legislative body of a "Constitutional Convention"? From where does it derive its authority? Why was there a need for a Bill of Rights? Did setting out a delineated list of rights reduce the authority or natural rights that were originally retained by the people, given that the Constitution was simply a form of power of attorney to authorize representatives of the People to carry out certain carefully delineated functions?
Wood's prose is crisp and lucid, though much of the text is a masterfully arranged tissue of quotations from Hamilton, Madison, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Noah Webster, et al. The bottom of each page has long string cites of quotations from source materials. The sheer amount of research put into this book borders on terrifying. But it is all put together in a clear and readable form.
That said, this is not a Joseph Ellis history of the early republic. There are no colorful anecdotes, no tidbits about shoe sizes, hobbies, nights out on the town, showy experiments with electricity, aptitude with the French language, etc. This is strictly a history of ideas, a history of the development of thinking about political science, checks and balances, tyrannies of majorities, of consolidated power, etc. So, in that sense, this book is clearly not for everyone. It's for you if you're deeply interested in the questions set out above in the first paragraph. Wood does a masterful job of charting the progress in the thinking of the Revolutionary generation, and how they came to their understandings of sovereignty, the purpose and role of a Constitution, the need for checks and balances, the nature of American society -- and human nature -- etc.
I found it to be a thrilling and deeply educational ride.
It must be noted, the book was published in 1969. That is not that long ago, and it is somewhat stunning that there is essentially no discussion of the issue of slavery or women or the reach of suffrage. Reading a history of the development of the Constitution today, that seems ridiculous. I understand that Wood dealt with these issues further in later works, but the total omission of these issues in this book is a massive hole.
Wood's prose is crisp and lucid, though much of the text is a masterfully arranged tissue of quotations from Hamilton, Madison, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Noah Webster, et al. The bottom of each page has long string cites of quotations from source materials. The sheer amount of research put into this book borders on terrifying. But it is all put together in a clear and readable form.
That said, this is not a Joseph Ellis history of the early republic. There are no colorful anecdotes, no tidbits about shoe sizes, hobbies, nights out on the town, showy experiments with electricity, aptitude with the French language, etc. This is strictly a history of ideas, a history of the development of thinking about political science, checks and balances, tyrannies of majorities, of consolidated power, etc. So, in that sense, this book is clearly not for everyone. It's for you if you're deeply interested in the questions set out above in the first paragraph. Wood does a masterful job of charting the progress in the thinking of the Revolutionary generation, and how they came to their understandings of sovereignty, the purpose and role of a Constitution, the need for checks and balances, the nature of American society -- and human nature -- etc.
I found it to be a thrilling and deeply educational ride.
It must be noted, the book was published in 1969. That is not that long ago, and it is somewhat stunning that there is essentially no discussion of the issue of slavery or women or the reach of suffrage. Reading a history of the development of the Constitution today, that seems ridiculous. I understand that Wood dealt with these issues further in later works, but the total omission of these issues in this book is a massive hole.
More...