How
I'm simultaneously reading The Anti-Federalist Papers and the
Constitutional Convention Debates, The Federalist Papers, and Debate on the Constitution
UPDATE!
Although
later collected as The Federalist Papers and considered the
seminal work on the authoring of the Constitution, those 85 essays
that were printed in New York newspapers in late 1787 and early
1788 (and subsequently and repeatedly reprinted all over the country)
were not standalone pieces. They came only after the Constitution
had been written, signed by all the states' delegates to the Constitutional
Convention, and sent to the state legislatures for ratification.
Before that could happen, there were fully four months of heated
debate among the states' delegates in Philadelphia regarding the
need for any changes to the existing Articles of Confederation,
and if so, what those changes should be.
When
the proposed Constitution was presented to the states for ratification,
the debate raged on in self-printed pamphlets and essays printed
in newspapers in the form of letters to the editor (often addressed
to the public). Essays from the Anti-Federalist side of the fence
(who greatly valued the sovereignty of the states and wanted a very
weak central government, very limited in its powers) were actually
some of the first to appear. Writers going by the pseudonyms Centinel,
Brutus, and The Federal Farmer had already had eloquent and important
essays printed within a month of the adjournment of the Convention.
Federalist #1 was written (as an introduction to the whole series)
by Alexander Hamilton in order to begin refuting arguments that
were already in public discourse.
Knowing
this, I didn't want to read The Federalist Papers front-to-back
and then follow with The Anti-Federalist Papers - it seems
to me that reading everything like that, with no context, timeline,
or correlation, would make a very disjointed understanding of the
time period and the arguments made. Fortunately, the edition
of The Anti-Federalist Papers I'm reading includes breakdowns
of Anti-Federalist and Federalist writings by topic, which specific
essays were addressing which, and a very detailed chronology of
speeches given and letters printed. Using that material, I plan
to read everything in chronological order, going back and forth
between the two books so I can follow the debate as I would have
been able to follow it in the late 18th century - starting with
some of the more important days of debate during the Convention,
then progressing to the printed essays. Look here
for a review when I finish!
Jason
Trippet
10 December
2004
UPDATE:
I received two pertinent gifts for Christmas this year - the two-volume
set of Debate on the Constitution, by Bernard Bailyn. It
contains an even more thorough treatment of the debate (both in
the press and in the state ratifying conventions) described above,
but there are overlaps and unique entries in each of the four volumes,
so I went through and catalogued everything
in chronological order so I would know when to switch between the
different books. This doesn't include the debates in the state ratifying
conventions - it makes more sense to read those in their entirety
one at a time rather than interspersed between accounts in the press.
Jason
Trippet
17 January
2005
|