What do you think?
Rate this book
Yale Contemporary Law Series
Origins of the Bill of Rights
In this fascinating history of the origins of the Bill of Rights, Pulitzer Prize -- winning historian Leonard W. Levy offers a panoramic view of the liberties secured by the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Levy illuminates the behind-the-scenes maneuverings, public rhetoric, and political motivations of James Madison and others who overcame fierce opposition to ensure the ratification of these crucial liberties.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1999
10 people are currently reading
165 people want to read
About the author
Leonard W. Levy
56 books7 followersLeonard Williams Levy was the Andrew W. Mellon All-Claremont Professor of Humanities and Chairman of the Graduate Faculty of History at Claremont Graduate School, California. He was educated at Columbia University, where his mentor for the Ph.D. degree was Henry Steele Commager.
Levy's most honored book was his 1968 study Origins of the Fifth Amendment, focusing on the history of the privilege against self-incrimination. This book was awarded the 1969 Pulitzer Prize for History. He wrote almost forty other books.
In 1990, Levy was appointed a Distinguished Scholar in Residence; Adjunct Professor of History and Political Science at Southern Oregon State College in Ashland, Oregon.
Levy's most honored book was his 1968 study Origins of the Fifth Amendment, focusing on the history of the privilege against self-incrimination. This book was awarded the 1969 Pulitzer Prize for History. He wrote almost forty other books.
In 1990, Levy was appointed a Distinguished Scholar in Residence; Adjunct Professor of History and Political Science at Southern Oregon State College in Ashland, Oregon.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
November 10, 2017
An excellent primer on the Bill of Rights. Origins of the Bill of Rights take the first ten amendments of the Constitution and explains their history. What Leonard W. Levy brings to life is how messy the entire process was at the time and haw far back some of the concepts actually began their life. He does a wonderful job with the history of each amendment and how some of our interpretations are far different than the founding fathers believed and how modern politics have twisted the words. Leonard W. Levy does not expressly describe comment on the modern politics, but lets the founding fathers and history speak for itself and it is brilliant.
This is not an easy read and it will take time to work though. Origins of the Bill of Rights demands attention and concentration. It is a very serious work of scholarly excellence. However, it is a very satisfying read and well worth the time. Each Amendment is broken down and both the history and politics are followed till the adaption into the Constitution.
My only quibble with the entire book is that Leonard W. Levy waffles with the Second Amendment. He seemly tries to have it both ways on his work, which is noticeably different from the tone of the rest of the book. I am not sure if he is not comfortable with what the history suggests or he really does not know how to handle such a delicate subject. Still an excellent chapter and should not be missed.
If you are looking for a primer, Origins of the Bill of Rights is the place to start.
This is not an easy read and it will take time to work though. Origins of the Bill of Rights demands attention and concentration. It is a very serious work of scholarly excellence. However, it is a very satisfying read and well worth the time. Each Amendment is broken down and both the history and politics are followed till the adaption into the Constitution.
My only quibble with the entire book is that Leonard W. Levy waffles with the Second Amendment. He seemly tries to have it both ways on his work, which is noticeably different from the tone of the rest of the book. I am not sure if he is not comfortable with what the history suggests or he really does not know how to handle such a delicate subject. Still an excellent chapter and should not be missed.
If you are looking for a primer, Origins of the Bill of Rights is the place to start.
March 17, 2014
This is an exceptionally frustrating book about the Bill of Rights (aka US Constitutional Amendments 1-10). The author seems to understand the subject quite well and even seems reasonably unbiased. The chapter on the 2nd Amendment and the author's argument (in favor of private gun ownership, but not unregulated) is possibly the best I've heard. However, the writing is painfully dry through most of the book. The first chapter, "Why We Have A Bill Of Rights", is particularly frustrating as it seems to jump around a great deal. I eventually gave up on the first chapter and started jumping ahead to subsequent chapters on the particular issues that had the greatest personal interest. Oddly, the book has no chapter dedicated to the 10th Amendment despite States Rights remaining a pretty big issue.
April 7, 2018
My daughter Bridey and her husband Jeff gave me this book 10 years ago. Little did I know after putting it aside that I would pick it up again in the age of Trumpism amid daily attacks on our institutions and the U.S. Constitution. Understanding the origin of the Bill of Rights, the English common law that preceded it and the work of our Founding Fathers towards that aim was not an easy task in this book. It was to a large extent forced but important reading. What I came away with is how difficult this "birth" was, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. So complicated and yet with all of the push and pull of getting the words right in both documents, somehow these documents were created and became living documents that we rely on today as a free and democratic nation. I have a greater appreciation of the work of James Madison's smart and deliberate work on the Bill of Rights amending the Constitution and the struggle between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists over the need for the Bill of Rights. I think I may be smarter as a result of reading this book...but boy did it "smart" in the process.
June 9, 2023
Well argued, well researched. Provides numerous background examples from England and America that underlie various amendments in the Bill of Rights and additional select rights withing the body of the US Constitution. Final chapter on the Ninth Amendment is particularly insightful. Levy occasionally allows his personal views come to the fore, but such instances are sufficiently obvious as to not detract from the whole.
April 25, 2019
Not for the summer soldier or the sunshine patriot, these pages be dense with legalese and concepts. Well intended and worthy, but not the most successful breakdown.
January 26, 2016
The individual liberties contained in the Bill of Rights are often cherished, forgotten, misunderstood, or taken for granted. Scholars have implemented different approaches when analyzing the history of the Bill of Rights. Studies may involve a general timeline which begins with the origins of individual English liberties and ends in an analysis of how the Bill of Rights translates for contemporary issues. Here the reader gains an understanding of how far back the ideas behind the amendments come from and how they hold up over time. Another way of studying the Bill of Rights is to examine its authors and the legislative processes behind its passage. The reader gains an appreciation of the political environment of Revolutionary America and what inspired those politicians to craft such an important national document.
Leonard Levy combines both of those approaches in Origins of the Bill of Rights by creating a study that looks at each individual liberty discussed in the constitutional amendments. Levy’s approach is not a narrative that begins with the origins of individual rights or follows a timeline-based path to the passage of the Bill of Rights. What Levy provides instead is an anthology in which each chapter scrutinizes a liberty, where its origins came from, the English and New World precedents of securing the right, and how the Federalists and Antifederalists fit the idea into their revolutionary discourse. In addition to the histories of each amendment, the reader encounters Levy’s personal interpretations on the liberty as well as the Bill of Rights in general.
Levy views the Bill of Rights as a political necessity born out of a Federalist attempt to rob the Antifederalists of their momentum. “The party that had first opposed the Bill of Rights inadvertently wound up with the responsibility for its framing and ratification, whereas the people who had at first professedly wanted it discovered too late that it not only was embarrassing but disastrous for their ulterior purposes.” James Madison is championed in the introduction as the mastermind who recognized the potential of the document and who utilized moderate political strategy to place the Bill of Rights in the center of debate. The introduction is where Levy creates the most captivating narrative of this collection.
Each following chapter entails a description of a liberty, its roots, and how it became part of the Bill of Rights. These sections are uneven as they do not share a narrative pattern and some subjects are thoroughly analyzed whereas others feel as if Levy was not interested in that particular amendment. For instance, many pages are dedicated to the Right to Bear Arms which are often compelling and end with an interesting interpretation of how this liberty translates into contemporary times. On the other hand, the chapter concerning Double Jeopardy is a mere seven pages long and does not go into great depth of the origins behind this idea or its incorporation into the Bill of Rights. In a given chapter, Levy may begin with the English origins of a liberty but in subsequent chapters this topic may not appear until the middle or last pages of a section. This creates scattered narratives throughout the study which may have worked better if Levy had structured a pattern for each subject. The format of examining each amendment is interesting but Levy’s approach makes them difficult to follow.
There is a theme that resonates throughout each chapter and that is the amendments consist of vague wording and difficult interpretations. For instance, Levy examines the role of militias in Revolutionary America and criticizes that notion behind the Second Amendment to be “bizarre, even loony, in character.” His chapter concerning the Ninth Amendment discusses similar indistinct ideas as he tries to answer what the amendment’s protected rights are. Throughout this chapter his asks the question twice without providing a consistent answer. The same topics appear in multiple chapters such as privacy, search and seizure, and religion which illustrates how difficult it is to assign a specific meaning to these amendments.
In spite of the inconsistent chapters, Levy raises interesting points about the liberties discussed in the Bill of Rights. The introductory chapter gets the readers attention and when the subsequent sections work, they involve wonderful analysis and interpretation. However, when the sections become muddled or the subjects appear to have been neglected, it causes frustration for the reader.
Leonard Levy combines both of those approaches in Origins of the Bill of Rights by creating a study that looks at each individual liberty discussed in the constitutional amendments. Levy’s approach is not a narrative that begins with the origins of individual rights or follows a timeline-based path to the passage of the Bill of Rights. What Levy provides instead is an anthology in which each chapter scrutinizes a liberty, where its origins came from, the English and New World precedents of securing the right, and how the Federalists and Antifederalists fit the idea into their revolutionary discourse. In addition to the histories of each amendment, the reader encounters Levy’s personal interpretations on the liberty as well as the Bill of Rights in general.
Levy views the Bill of Rights as a political necessity born out of a Federalist attempt to rob the Antifederalists of their momentum. “The party that had first opposed the Bill of Rights inadvertently wound up with the responsibility for its framing and ratification, whereas the people who had at first professedly wanted it discovered too late that it not only was embarrassing but disastrous for their ulterior purposes.” James Madison is championed in the introduction as the mastermind who recognized the potential of the document and who utilized moderate political strategy to place the Bill of Rights in the center of debate. The introduction is where Levy creates the most captivating narrative of this collection.
Each following chapter entails a description of a liberty, its roots, and how it became part of the Bill of Rights. These sections are uneven as they do not share a narrative pattern and some subjects are thoroughly analyzed whereas others feel as if Levy was not interested in that particular amendment. For instance, many pages are dedicated to the Right to Bear Arms which are often compelling and end with an interesting interpretation of how this liberty translates into contemporary times. On the other hand, the chapter concerning Double Jeopardy is a mere seven pages long and does not go into great depth of the origins behind this idea or its incorporation into the Bill of Rights. In a given chapter, Levy may begin with the English origins of a liberty but in subsequent chapters this topic may not appear until the middle or last pages of a section. This creates scattered narratives throughout the study which may have worked better if Levy had structured a pattern for each subject. The format of examining each amendment is interesting but Levy’s approach makes them difficult to follow.
There is a theme that resonates throughout each chapter and that is the amendments consist of vague wording and difficult interpretations. For instance, Levy examines the role of militias in Revolutionary America and criticizes that notion behind the Second Amendment to be “bizarre, even loony, in character.” His chapter concerning the Ninth Amendment discusses similar indistinct ideas as he tries to answer what the amendment’s protected rights are. Throughout this chapter his asks the question twice without providing a consistent answer. The same topics appear in multiple chapters such as privacy, search and seizure, and religion which illustrates how difficult it is to assign a specific meaning to these amendments.
In spite of the inconsistent chapters, Levy raises interesting points about the liberties discussed in the Bill of Rights. The introductory chapter gets the readers attention and when the subsequent sections work, they involve wonderful analysis and interpretation. However, when the sections become muddled or the subjects appear to have been neglected, it causes frustration for the reader.
March 22, 2016
"The party that had first opposed the Bill of Rights inadvertently wound up with the responsibility for its framing and ratification, whereas the people who had at first professedly wanted it discovered too late that it not only was embarrassing but disastrous for their ulterior purposes." (43)
"Nowhere in America after 1776 did an establishment of religion restrict itself to as state church or to a system of public support for one sect alone; instead, an establishment of religion meant public support of several or all churches, with preference to none." (97)
"No state got rid of the common-law concept of seditious libel. No state gave statutory or constitutional recognition to the overt acts test embodied in the preamble of Virginia's 1786 statute. No state adopted truth as a defense during the period 1776-1789. If an objective of the Revolution was to repudiate Blackstone's exposition of the common-law restrictions on freedom of expression, how very strange that Americans of the revolutionary generation did not say so." (111)
"Everything that libertarians had ever demanded was incorporated into the Sedition Act: a requirement that criminal intent be shown; the power of the jury to decide whether the accused's statement was libelous as a matter of law as well as of fact; and truth as a defense, which was an innovation not accepted in England until 1843. By every standard the Sedition Act was a great victory for libertarian principles of freedom of the press -- except that libertarian standards abruptly changed." (126)
"If all it [the second amendment] meant was the right to be a soldier or serve in the military, whether in the militia or in the army, it would hardly be a cherished right and would never have reached constitutional status in the Bill of Rights. The 'right' to be a soldier does not make much sense." (135)
"The history of the writing of the first American bills of rights and constitutions simply does not bear out the presupposition that the process was a diligent or systematic one. Those documents, which we uncritically exalt, were imitative, deficient, and irrationally selective. In the glorious act of framing a social compact expressive of the supreme law, Americans tended simply to draw up a random catalog of rights that seemed to satisfy their urge for a statement of first principles -- or for some of them. That task was executed in a disordered fashion that verged on ineptness." (186)
"Trial by jury was a form of trial available only in the king's courts and eventually triumphed over other forms of trial because it was the only one that offered a decision based on facts rather than on divine miracles, as in the instance of trial by water or fire or any other ordeal." (210-1)
"Nowhere in America after 1776 did an establishment of religion restrict itself to as state church or to a system of public support for one sect alone; instead, an establishment of religion meant public support of several or all churches, with preference to none." (97)
"No state got rid of the common-law concept of seditious libel. No state gave statutory or constitutional recognition to the overt acts test embodied in the preamble of Virginia's 1786 statute. No state adopted truth as a defense during the period 1776-1789. If an objective of the Revolution was to repudiate Blackstone's exposition of the common-law restrictions on freedom of expression, how very strange that Americans of the revolutionary generation did not say so." (111)
"Everything that libertarians had ever demanded was incorporated into the Sedition Act: a requirement that criminal intent be shown; the power of the jury to decide whether the accused's statement was libelous as a matter of law as well as of fact; and truth as a defense, which was an innovation not accepted in England until 1843. By every standard the Sedition Act was a great victory for libertarian principles of freedom of the press -- except that libertarian standards abruptly changed." (126)
"If all it [the second amendment] meant was the right to be a soldier or serve in the military, whether in the militia or in the army, it would hardly be a cherished right and would never have reached constitutional status in the Bill of Rights. The 'right' to be a soldier does not make much sense." (135)
"The history of the writing of the first American bills of rights and constitutions simply does not bear out the presupposition that the process was a diligent or systematic one. Those documents, which we uncritically exalt, were imitative, deficient, and irrationally selective. In the glorious act of framing a social compact expressive of the supreme law, Americans tended simply to draw up a random catalog of rights that seemed to satisfy their urge for a statement of first principles -- or for some of them. That task was executed in a disordered fashion that verged on ineptness." (186)
"Trial by jury was a form of trial available only in the king's courts and eventually triumphed over other forms of trial because it was the only one that offered a decision based on facts rather than on divine miracles, as in the instance of trial by water or fire or any other ordeal." (210-1)
February 15, 2011
Caveat: My star rating may be biased by a level of complex detail that I did not expect, having mistaken something clearly written for a more academic and/or law school audience for the sort of more general history I am accusomed to reading. Still, once started I persevered to the end. I cannot fault it for detail. There is plenty.
An amusing point Levy makes is one I have also seen from other authors: The English have had a talent for inventing new writes by claiming them to be old rights guaranteed under the law since time immemorial. Or at least since the signing of the Magna Carta. The revolutionary generation of the American colonies carried on the tradition.
Thumbnail: This book traces the evolution of the various rights protected under the Bill of Rights through generations of British and later colonial usage. Levy provides exhaustive examples of court cases that defined or refined these rights. He also recounts examples examples of their previous appearance in various colonial documents, like the Virginia Bill of rights. Coverage is given of the legal debates that accompanying the formulation of the Bill of Rights and to its eventual passage. Lastly, Levy examines what the concepts invoked meant to the people of the day, which is often different from how they are interpreted now.
This is a very informative read, but not a light or easy read.
An amusing point Levy makes is one I have also seen from other authors: The English have had a talent for inventing new writes by claiming them to be old rights guaranteed under the law since time immemorial. Or at least since the signing of the Magna Carta. The revolutionary generation of the American colonies carried on the tradition.
Thumbnail: This book traces the evolution of the various rights protected under the Bill of Rights through generations of British and later colonial usage. Levy provides exhaustive examples of court cases that defined or refined these rights. He also recounts examples examples of their previous appearance in various colonial documents, like the Virginia Bill of rights. Coverage is given of the legal debates that accompanying the formulation of the Bill of Rights and to its eventual passage. Lastly, Levy examines what the concepts invoked meant to the people of the day, which is often different from how they are interpreted now.
This is a very informative read, but not a light or easy read.
September 1, 2013
The pugnaciously iconoclastic Professor's overview of the first ten amendments to the Constitution likely has something in it to offend everyone. But if you want one short book to review these critical elements of the national gov't, this book is the one.
January 24, 2010
Great book, I loved learning about the Bill of Rights. Not as entertaining as it is informative, but still a great book to read.
Read
September 23, 2010Origins of the Bill of Rights (Yale Contemporary Law Series) by Leonard W. Levy (2001)
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews