The Men Who Invented the Constitution (The Simon & Schuster America Collection)

The Summer of 1787 is quite simply a well written book. The author very skillfully presents both sketches of the participant personalities and the
events that transpired. If you want to know about the significant elements of the Constitution and how they were included, this is the book to read.
The author excels at explaining the impact of the subject of slave states
versus free states. What I wanted to do as a reader was visit the events
of the Constitutional Convention, learn what happened, and learn who was there and what they did. I accomplished these goals. This is a straight forward book which is quite readable from the prose standpoint. It gives
you what you need to know but also piques one's interest to learn more
about some of the specifics.

Richard Macomber
Cape Coral, FL

a very detailed look at the process which created our Constitution during the The Summer of 1787. To establish that which had never before existed in the history of mankind, a government governed by the people and for the people was an arduous and difficult process. David O. Stewart does a fine job of giving us a glimpse into that process. The egos, the fight between small states and large states and the uncomfortable appeasement of the Southern states rights to slavery all create a boiling cauldron from which our government was formed.

The Summer of 1787 is simply spectacular. Stewart flawlessly weaves atmosphere, the tempers and personalities of the men at the convention, personal letters (and of course personal politics), as well as each piece of information that seems to possibly be available about the fateful Philadelphia summer into this gripping book. Without bias, this work portrays the genius, morality (although often defective - the issue of slavery played quite a significant role and this is not in any way overlooked by Stewart), integrity and diligence of the men who truly laid the governmental foundation for the United States of America. What I find to be the most compelling about this book is that Stewart, making great use of the limited historical resources available, really delves into the lives and personalities of the delegates, making the whole process seem more human. A great read for people interested in both history and modern politics. It's an old cliché, but you truly can't know where you're going until you understand where you come from, and this work concisely and effectively explains how the Constitution came about. To give yourself an edge in political debate, read this book (and the Constitution itself, of course) and truly understand the fundamental basis of your argument.

David Stewart may be a lawyer by profession, but by nature he's a born storyteller. THE SUMMER OF 1787 shows the touch of a novelist, lifting the Founding Fathers out of dry textbooks and breathing life back into them. As in a novel, I got a sense of the players as characters in a drama. As in a novel, chapters end on suspenseful notes. You may know how this story comes out, but you're on the edge of your chair all the same.

I learned something too: The antecedents of, and reasons for, the Electoral College. Before Reading THE SUMMER OF 1787, I never realized the degree to which slavery shaped its development. David Stewart's explanations and examples are clear and insightful.

THE SUMMER OF 1787 is American history the easy way. Factual and enlightening to be sure, but also fun to read. Why couldn't they have taught it this way in school?

-- The reviewer is the author of To Love Mercy, a novel.

A quick pace read of the invention of our Constitution. Stewart's book teaches readers tons about the people who have pushed to the back of the American lexicon. We learn about all of players involved, not just Washington, Madison and Hamilton. The book spends a considerable amount of time discussing the impact of the Three-Fifths Compromise, an abomination on our history. Stewart is not afraid to shine a light on the dark parts of our history, and this is a well-written account of the Constitution that Americans should read to discover that others besides Madison worked on this document.

David O. Stewart has written an excellent book about the 'invention' of the U. S. Constitution. He provides pithy thumbnail sketches of the characters--both major and minor. Chapter 12--"The Ipswich Miracle, July 13"--he writes of Nathan Dane and Reverend Manasseh Cutler--who could be regarded as America's first lobbyist. Because of the Rev. Cutler--The Northwest Territory was ordained as slave free--a monumental step for the time.

What surprised me--was how much a role American Slavery played in the development of the U.S. Constitution. Not a footnote to the development--but a major trope, a pier to the Nation's Constitution. Washington, Madison, Mason, Rutledge, the Pinckey's, Major Butler. (Jefferson too was a slave holder but was Minister to France at the time of the Convention.) The discourse on the shame of slavery, the shame of deeds that slavery ensued, the open contradiction between Jefferson's "All men are created equal' and slavery--was all self-evident to the slave holding delegates. Rufus King spoke strenuously against slavery. In particular the notion that Black slaves as property could be counted as 3/5 of a person--thus giving a state like Georgia an inordinate strength--that is to say for every 100 freemen--an extra 35 votes would be added; and with this extra strength the south could, according to South Carolina's General Pinckney "...secured an unlimited importation of negroes for twenty years, ...the general government could never emancipate them, ...obtained a right to recover our slaves in whatever part of America they may take refuge..." And that Black property counting as 3/5 a person gave the South power to control the discourse on Slavery until the outbreak of the Civil War.

And one can't help but wonder that the debate (actually more a screed) on what the 2nd amendment means is not the modern equivalent of the 1787 -- 1860 slave debates for its bitterness and intensity. As one looks at Article I, Section 8, clauses 15 & 16--there would seem to be intent that a Militia be under the control of Congress for the suppression of insurrections. (Clause 15--[Congress...] To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; Clause 16--To provide for organizing and arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.) Hamilton would express similar sentiments in Federalist Paper #29. The Founding Fathers would not have approved of every homeowner with a military assault rifle. Indeed, Shay's rebellion was as much a motivation for the need of a strong central Federal government to control these mob tendencies for armed insurrection; Washington and Mason were of one mind in this regarding a need for a stronger central government to prevent armed mob insurrection.

The 1787 Constitutional Convention was no small miracle given the sectarian differences and needs of the North and South. They compromised on slavery full well knowing that slavery contradicted the very nature of their avowed principle of democracy--all men are created equal--and there were voices in the convention that the nation would regret their course of action regarding slavery.

Stewarts's book recounts the major players, the major principles in a day by day recounting of that summer. This day by day recounting makes the book readable, the complexity comprehensible-- the book is an important adjunct to the study of American History as it places slavery as a pier to the American world view that would erupt in the Civil War some 73 years later.

First off, let me say that if detailed history is your thing, this book is superb. If you are like me and are extremely interested in American history but appreciate movement along with details, this book will interest you but not excite you.
The chapters focus on different subjects roughly following the timeline of the convention, thus giving a feeling of compartmentalization to the book. This serves well when discussing major issues such as the 3/5ths Compromise or the final wording; but I feel it sort of removes a bit of the connectedness that the debates must have had. Surely the delegates could not ignore international trade while discussing slavery, or the powers of the judiciary while setting up the legislature!
The book does an excellent job of quoting the delegates' personal observations that they left for posterity, and of humanizing the now-legendary Founding Fathers. Still, sometimes all this referencing slows down the pace, often a few too many delegates are quoted.
On top of this, the Convention itself bored and frustrated the delegates as the book mentions. Debate dragged on, amendment after amendment was voted on and many delegates skipped parts of the Convention. Thus the moments of high drama are somewhat spread out and sections seem to drag as the author has to repeat the frustration of certain of the members.
All in all, read this book if you are a fan of either early America or Constitutional history, especially the generation who founded this nation.

This was an easy fun read but not grounding breaking. I would recommend this for a casual historian looking for a quick read. The book though does not go in depth on the matter as a whole. The end of the book becomes a drag and lacks any forethought or review of the process as a whole

A very interesting read that will explain some of the more important political decisions of our country. The book did a great job of explaining how these men came up with the ideas of Congress and the Presidency. I also enjoyed the author's opinion of the electoral college and it's roots. For any US history fan out there, this book is a nice addition to your library and will round out your history knowledge.

I read this before "Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution" by Richard Beeman and was fairly satisfied with the narrative and the history. As a scholar of the US Supreme Court, I liked the idea of reading a book written by Justice Lewis Powell's former law clerk David O. Stewart. This was an otherwise solid history of the Constitutional Convention of 1787; however, it left me desiring more.

What difference did rooming assignments make on the founding of our nation? Quite a bit, it turns out.
It has never occurred to me to consider who slept at the same boarding house or sat at neighboring desks when wondering how the Constitution came to be, but David Stewart's approach in examining the creation of the country through the personalities of the founders was fascinating. Did it matter who brought their wives to Philadelphia that Summer? Turns out that it did. Of course the personalities of the people who worked together to craft the document found their reflection in their work.
Thank you for this important bit of scholarship.

If your American History studies were like mine, they jumped from the Revolution to the election of George Washington with little mention of the years inbetween. Now you can learn just how twelve colonies (Rhode Island did not participate) met to form the basis for our nation. It is a very readable yet factual book, with plenty of footnotes. I would recommend it to any reader, young or old.

David O. Stewart does an excellent job documenting the details of the Philadelphia convention. This book reads like a novel rather than a dull, dry history book. I've read some of the Federalist Papers which is a defense of the Constitution but I always desired to read an account of the actual debates within the convention.

As a Canadian with spotty knowledge about the Constitutional Convention, I found this book to be fascinating. It manages to balance out the personalities, the setting, and the issues in an interesting (and dryly humourous) fashion. I highly recommend this book as an excellent buy for anyone interested in learning more about one of the most pivotal periods in U.S. history.

This is one of the most readable and enjoyable history book I have ever read. It certainly depicts the tortuous development and atmosphere surrounding the process of writing the Constitution in a way that makes one feel part of it. I could not put the book down for any length of time!

"...to produce the flawed but enduring document that would define the nation -- then and now."

I am immediately distrustful of any publication that has the familiar anti-Constitution catchphrases in the product description. We are led to believe by "historians" with an agenda that the Constitution is imperfect (admittedly because man created it), so much so that it should be done away with and replaced with one that will "honor all views." In fact, the original Constitution does guarantee that all views are to be honored in our society. However, the new ageanda is to expand government so much so that it forces a single viewpoint on us all. The document is not a "living, breathing" one, but a basis for a free society.

Better to read Hillsdale College's Constitution Reader used as a textbook in that institution's Constitution curriculum.

The progressives will line up to deride this review (granted it is more of a warning for those who truly want to learn about the document and the men who produced it), and that's fine. But we live in a country where certain buzzwords should make us wary, and those quoted above are some of them.

This book is a collection of anecdotes about the Constitutional Convention and the Framers.

I was hoping for illumination, what I got was a collection of odds & ends that reveal little more than we already know.

As one of the professional reviews in the beginning of the book states: "If you read only one book about the Constitution, let it be 'The Summer of 1787.'"
Good, because I'm not reading another. The ridiculous amount of time and effort required to slough through this book was not worth the knowledge that, admittedly, I did gain. I don't usually mind required reading for my classes. THIS was the exception. If this is the indicator for my year in AP U.S. Government, I'd better drop the class right now.

Hideous.

If history has always seemed inaccessible to you, this is the book for you. An engaging look at a summer which produced the country's most important and enduring document. If the Constitution is your earthly version of the Bible, you'll be inspired by the stories of the sinners who invented it.