What do you think?
Madison’s Hand: Revising the Constitutional Convention
James Madison s Notes on the 1787 Constitutional Convention have acquired nearly unquestioned authority as the description of the U.S. Constitution s creation. No document provides a more complete record of the deliberations in Philadelphia or depicts the Convention s charismatic figures, crushing disappointments, and miraculous triumphs with such narrative force. But how reliable is this account?
In an unprecedented investigation that draws on digital technologies and traditional textual analysis to trace Madison s composition, Mary Sarah Bilder reveals that Madison revised the Notes to a far greater extent than previously recognized. The Notes began as a diary of the Convention s proceedings. Madison abandoned the project at a critical juncture, however, and left the Notes incomplete. He did not return to finish them until several years later, largely for Thomas Jefferson. By then, Madison s views were influenced by the new government s challenges and Jefferson s political ideas. Madison s evolving vision of republican government, his Virginia allegiances, his openness to constitutional protection for slavery, his fascination with the finer points of political jockeying, and his depictions of Alexander Hamilton and Charles Pinckney shifted during the writing and rewriting of his account. When the Notes were finally published in 1840, the layers of revision were invisible.
Madison s version of events quickly assumed an aura of objectivity, and the Notes molded the narrative of the Constitution. Madison s Hand offers readers a biography of a document that, over two centuries, developed a life and character all its own.
"
In an unprecedented investigation that draws on digital technologies and traditional textual analysis to trace Madison s composition, Mary Sarah Bilder reveals that Madison revised the Notes to a far greater extent than previously recognized. The Notes began as a diary of the Convention s proceedings. Madison abandoned the project at a critical juncture, however, and left the Notes incomplete. He did not return to finish them until several years later, largely for Thomas Jefferson. By then, Madison s views were influenced by the new government s challenges and Jefferson s political ideas. Madison s evolving vision of republican government, his Virginia allegiances, his openness to constitutional protection for slavery, his fascination with the finer points of political jockeying, and his depictions of Alexander Hamilton and Charles Pinckney shifted during the writing and rewriting of his account. When the Notes were finally published in 1840, the layers of revision were invisible.
Madison s version of events quickly assumed an aura of objectivity, and the Notes molded the narrative of the Constitution. Madison s Hand offers readers a biography of a document that, over two centuries, developed a life and character all its own.
"
382 pages, Hardcover
First published October 19, 2015
About the author
Mary Sarah Bilder
6 books5 followersMary Sarah Bilder teaches at Boston College Law School in the areas of property, trusts and estates, and American legal and constitutional history.
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
October 16, 2016
An interesting-enough study of Madison's character and changing politics through his Notes, although I wish it had focused more on the Notes themselves rather than chronicling the Constitutional Convention. It didn't get really interesting to me until Part V and the Conclusion, when the heavier and more-frequent post-Convention edits begin. Really, I think what I was hoping for was a fleshed-out, contextualized version of her weirdly-isolated Evidence chapter. But then again, this was written by a professor of law, not of literature/material culture/collections! A solid book, but it left me generally disappointed and wanting at the end.
Read
June 24, 2016"James Madison has long been treated as a neutral authority on early American history, a kind of Great Sage of, among other things, the U.S. Constitution. Thus, in a notable book on the ratification campaign of 1787–90—during which the states agreed to live under the Philadelphia Convention’s handiwork—a prominent historian said that the best way to begin to learn about the Revolutionary period was by reading James Madison’s mail."
Read the full review, "Can You Trust James Madison?" at our website:
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
Read the full review, "Can You Trust James Madison?" at our website:
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
May 25, 2020
Quite an interesting analysis of Madison's Notes on the constitutional convention. Bilder finds that Madison edited the Notes at several points between 1787 and their publication in the 1830s.
April 19, 2026
I feel so grateful to have taken a class from Professor Bilder. Coming out of that experience, I had exceedingly high expectations…and this book did not disappoint! Incredibly well researched and engagingly written. A must-read for anyone interested in rounding out their knowledge of the founding era.
March 25, 2016
I read this for my second paper for an online course; otherwise, I probably would not have read it. It was a fascinating book. It discusses not only Madison's motivations for keeping a diary [of sorts] about the Constitutional Convention, it also discusses the methods in which he took the notes. The author discusses her interpretations of why he did what he did, what his motivations were, and she does a good job of supporting her theories/ideas about Madison's work.
It is fascinating because there was an official record keeper and maybe two or three others who kept diaries about the Convention, but nobody else was nearly as thorough as Madison was in terms of his notekeeping/recordkeeping, and Madison was not that thorough, either, when you consider the delegates met for six hours each day and Madison could not possibly have recorded everything that was said and done, even if he had wanted to do so. The reader discovers there were gaps in terms of when the event actually occurred versus when it was actually written down; it might have been several hours later, it might have been days, weeks, or even months later. It is easy to assume that Madison's notes were written as the events occurred, but it did not happen that way.
This is not to say that Madison did a terrible job creating a record; he did an excellent job, in most respects. At the same time, he did not write down anything upon which he disagreed. He did not write down the speeches given by opponents; he did not write down bills or ideas presented by those he considered 'the opposing party' or he did not support. He ignored that which did not interest him. Even though he had an idea, a suspicion, that it might be a good idea to keep a record and he acted upon it, he still was quite biased in what he recorded/kept track of.
The people meeting at the Constitutional Convention had no idea they would be creating a document that would form the basis for the lasting system of government that we had today. They were creating what they hoped was the best alternative to what was currently available. They knew the Articles of Confederation was not working in terms of being the foundation for a government; they hoped this new Constitution would last, but they had no idea as to whether or not it would.
I also found out that Madison not only revised his notes one time, but that he revised them many times! He alternated the order in which he said events occurred, thereby jumbling our understanding of when speeches were given or groups met or whathaveyou. We learn that that his notes are not quite as unbiased as we would like to believe them to be, and because of this we need to read his Notes with an open mind. They were written for a specific reason, with a specific intent in mind. They were written to present and support Madison's views and the issues he believed to be important; the views and opinions of his opponents did not matter and were not important enough for him to consider writing down for posterity's sake.
I had no idea that Madison kept a record of the Constitutional Convention and what transpired during this tumultuous time, so I really could not have commented on the Convention itself. I know I was amongst those who believed that Jefferson wrote the Constitution for the longest time [up until five to ten years ago]; it is amusing how Jefferson is still associated with the Constitution even after all this time. Needless to say, the book was a bit more of an eye opener to me than I thought it would be.
I am glad I had to read this book for my class; otherwise, I probably would never have read it of my own volition.
Ultimately, I enjoyed
It is fascinating because there was an official record keeper and maybe two or three others who kept diaries about the Convention, but nobody else was nearly as thorough as Madison was in terms of his notekeeping/recordkeeping, and Madison was not that thorough, either, when you consider the delegates met for six hours each day and Madison could not possibly have recorded everything that was said and done, even if he had wanted to do so. The reader discovers there were gaps in terms of when the event actually occurred versus when it was actually written down; it might have been several hours later, it might have been days, weeks, or even months later. It is easy to assume that Madison's notes were written as the events occurred, but it did not happen that way.
This is not to say that Madison did a terrible job creating a record; he did an excellent job, in most respects. At the same time, he did not write down anything upon which he disagreed. He did not write down the speeches given by opponents; he did not write down bills or ideas presented by those he considered 'the opposing party' or he did not support. He ignored that which did not interest him. Even though he had an idea, a suspicion, that it might be a good idea to keep a record and he acted upon it, he still was quite biased in what he recorded/kept track of.
The people meeting at the Constitutional Convention had no idea they would be creating a document that would form the basis for the lasting system of government that we had today. They were creating what they hoped was the best alternative to what was currently available. They knew the Articles of Confederation was not working in terms of being the foundation for a government; they hoped this new Constitution would last, but they had no idea as to whether or not it would.
I also found out that Madison not only revised his notes one time, but that he revised them many times! He alternated the order in which he said events occurred, thereby jumbling our understanding of when speeches were given or groups met or whathaveyou. We learn that that his notes are not quite as unbiased as we would like to believe them to be, and because of this we need to read his Notes with an open mind. They were written for a specific reason, with a specific intent in mind. They were written to present and support Madison's views and the issues he believed to be important; the views and opinions of his opponents did not matter and were not important enough for him to consider writing down for posterity's sake.
I had no idea that Madison kept a record of the Constitutional Convention and what transpired during this tumultuous time, so I really could not have commented on the Convention itself. I know I was amongst those who believed that Jefferson wrote the Constitution for the longest time [up until five to ten years ago]; it is amusing how Jefferson is still associated with the Constitution even after all this time. Needless to say, the book was a bit more of an eye opener to me than I thought it would be.
I am glad I had to read this book for my class; otherwise, I probably would never have read it of my own volition.
Ultimately, I enjoyed
February 15, 2017
A bit of a dry read at times, but still fascinating if you have an interest in the subject matter. Bilder shows in meticulous detail how Madison recorded his notes during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and how he later revised them to distance himself from some of his earlier, more controversial positions, and to better serve the political ambitions and agenda of Thomas Jefferson. This book makes for a good companion piece to several others about that period, including Pauline Maier's "Ratification" and Fergus Bordewich's "The First Congress".
November 25, 2016
A good or great book is one that gets the reader to think and think more. A book about American political history and philosophy needs to bring the reader to a new place , a greater awareness and understanding of the past that one already knows about. The back cover endorsements of Mary Sarah Bilders confirm the obvious, that "anyone who wants to understand the Constitution must take this book into account". I will leave it to more qualified Goodreads members to comment on the Constitutional aspects of Bilder's research, but for this particular student of the American Constitution and Founders, it was eye opening and intriguing at the same time.
We mostly view the Founders through rosé tinted glasses, blinded or at least partially blinded by the brilliance of their efforts to create the world anew. I have always tilted more towards the Hamiltonian view of American progress, yet still accepted Madison as the so called Father of the Constitution. Much of his reputation in this regard comes from his authorship of his Notes of the Convention, which for academics, politicos and the public at large has been the basic default source of knowledge and understanding of the Founders intent and work. Bilder's research and conclusions are remarkable in challenging our understanding of the Notes, and for me at least, of Madison himself.
What emerges is a more nuanced, human view of Madison and his evolving relationship with the Notes and his own posterity and legacy. I finished wondering what he, James Madison, was thinking about as he faced the last few months of his life in 1836, and realizing that his Notes bore less and less connection and relevance to the actual events of 1787.
This book shall sit in pride of place next to my copy of the Federalist, Hamilton's works and Farrand's volumes as my own personal Constitutional resource. Read it and enjoy!
We mostly view the Founders through rosé tinted glasses, blinded or at least partially blinded by the brilliance of their efforts to create the world anew. I have always tilted more towards the Hamiltonian view of American progress, yet still accepted Madison as the so called Father of the Constitution. Much of his reputation in this regard comes from his authorship of his Notes of the Convention, which for academics, politicos and the public at large has been the basic default source of knowledge and understanding of the Founders intent and work. Bilder's research and conclusions are remarkable in challenging our understanding of the Notes, and for me at least, of Madison himself.
What emerges is a more nuanced, human view of Madison and his evolving relationship with the Notes and his own posterity and legacy. I finished wondering what he, James Madison, was thinking about as he faced the last few months of his life in 1836, and realizing that his Notes bore less and less connection and relevance to the actual events of 1787.
This book shall sit in pride of place next to my copy of the Federalist, Hamilton's works and Farrand's volumes as my own personal Constitutional resource. Read it and enjoy!
August 9, 2021
Fascinating study of Madison's writings on the Constitutional Convention. The author -- or should we call her a detective -- treats the relevant manuscripts like an archaeological dig, noting all of the various strata that were added over decades of work. What a tremendous amount of work this must have been. And it's truly amazing how much information about changes, and the reasons for them, she could tease out in her analysis. I have read a couple books on the convention prior to this and I suspect they should be rewritten now. For example, most such books will say that the small states and the slave states allied in order to create equal representation in the Senate and the 3/5 rule. But here we learn that actually it was Madison who first tried to create an alliance based on slavery. And so on. As even today people are looking at accounts of the convention to help them figure out the intent of the Constitution, this is a very important book indeed.
Read
May 9, 2016James Madison has long been treated as a neutral authority on early American history, a kind of Great Sage of, among other things, the U.S. Constitution. Thus, in a notable book on the ratification campaign of 1787–90—during which the states agreed to live under the Philadelphia Convention’s handiwork—a prominent historian said that the best way to begin to learn about the Revolutionary period was by reading James Madison’s mail.
There have been numerous books taking as their points of departure various of Madison’s accounts of things. Despite the fact that other delegates kept partial notes of the Philadelphia Convention, for example, certain works have relied exclusively on his.
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
There have been numerous books taking as their points of departure various of Madison’s accounts of things. Despite the fact that other delegates kept partial notes of the Philadelphia Convention, for example, certain works have relied exclusively on his.
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
November 11, 2015
A fascinating glimpse into the mind of James Madison and the Constitutional Convention. The book is full of technical detail and analysis, but remained an interesting read at all times.
January 7, 2017
I really tired of this quickly.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews