The Quartet: Orchestrating the Second American Revolution, 1783-1789

The Quartet is Joseph Ellis' history of the six years leading to the crafting and adoption of the Constitution of the United States. There are 220 pages of text in the print edition, three appendices, notes, bibliography and index. Ellis' focus is on the four individuals most responsible for the creation of this seminal American document: Washington, Hamilton, Madison and Jay. The book is elegantly and concisely written, and, though this is a widely studied topic, insightfully presents a great deal of new material. I read this work in just two sittings and I am astounded by Ellis' important and convincing conclusions relating to modern interpretations of the Constitution.One of Ellis' objectives in writing Quartet is to recover and reinterpret the "and then" part of this historical timeline, as in "Americans declared Independence in 1776 and then adopted the Constitution to establish a new government." That "and then" period was actually a twelve year slog to an improbable conclusion which secured our independence and set the course for national success.One surprise in this account is the key role of John Jay, who is rarely mentioned as a founder of our republic. Jay negotiated the peace treaty with Britain and singlehandedly more than doubled our territory by extending U.S. borders to the Mississippi. This territory needed a strong government to oversee settlement and governance, and finally convinced the political class that The Articles of Confederation were in need of reform. He also contributed to the Federalist Papers and worked tirelessly to win approval of the proposed Constitution in New York, a key (and recalcitrant) state afflicted with a parochial political machine.Ellis also removes the aura of the sacred from his portrait of the creation of the Constitution. For example, he points out that Madison wrote the Bill of Rights not as a expression of high political philosophy, but as a pragmatic device to head off calls for a second convention to amend and possibly kill the constitution. All the same, he resists cynicism and shows the Quartet to be genuine patriots and selfless public servants.Ellis relates all this in a very literate style. He notes for example, that interpreting this premodern society using our modern constructs is like trying "to plant cut flowers." This comment introduces insights into the reason slavery was not an issue that could have been resolved in the Constitution at its crafting (Short answer: There would have been no Constitution had the issue been raised). There are also occasions of humor, as when President Washington asks congressman Madison to ghostwrite a message to Congress, and Congress unaware of the author, asks Madison to write a reply.Perhaps most controversially, Ellis challenges the idea of interpreting the Constitution using the original intent of the founders as a guide, for how is this possible when the founders believed that the document should be reinterpreted, as Jefferson wrote, "as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered"? Ellis uses newly published material related to the correspondence of representatives to the Confederation Congress and records of the mostly overlooked proceedings of state ratifying conventions to bolster his conclusions.In a recent interview with CBS News, Ellis acknowledges his preoccupation with this period (Founding Brothers--Pulitzer Prize, American Sphinx--National Book Award) and sheepishly suggests that it is time he move on. I hope that he reconsiders and once again peers into those dark eighteenth century rooms and enlightens us as to their true contents. Perhaps he will elaborate ideas from Quartet and explain why John Jay was truly a founding father or will explain Madison's stunning reversal from a strong government nationalist to become a Jeffersonian democrat. In the meantime, I recommend that you read this book.

Very readable book, interlaced with author’s conclusions which he asserts are supported by his reading and synthesis of facts from various scholars and sources. There are occasional appearances of liberal bias. The main opinion related to modern situation is that, regarding the Constitutional interpretation based on “original intention”, is not valid and explicitly the 2nd Amendment Heller decision is wrong and that 2nd Amendment only applies to the militia based on a Madison draft of what would become the 2nd Amendment, that was never passed by Congress. The “original intent” doctrine is based on the understanding of the makers intent of an agreement as it came to be ratified in its final form, not on some intermediate draft. Ellis assertion on this point does not have merit. Similarly, the author asserts that the Philadelphia Convention delegates exceeded their authority and the Articles of Confederation (AoC), Article XIII, regarding unanimity for ratification was violated. It does not appear that he has read the commissions of the various states that were issued before February 21, 1787. Nor did he take into account that seven states had answered the call to Philadelphia, from Annapolis, before the Articles Congress acted to endorse the call. Nor that the Philadelphia Convention informed Congress and sent them a copy of the draft plan and that AoC Congress forwarded that plan to the states for ratification, thereby complying with AoC Article VI section 2 regarding entering into agreements among the states. The Philadelphia Convention was called outside the bounds of the Articles of Confederation not under its provisions. He does, however, assert the progressive era positions regarding economic motivations of the founders, described by Beard and Jensen, has been thoroughly discredited and are without merit. He also document the total failure of the AoC as an instrument upon which to govern and that its replacement was viewed as a crisis by the Quartet. One can only speculate what would have happened had the Philadelphia Convention failed or if the U.S. Constitution had not been adopted. Ellis accuses the colonists “… of a policy of genocide in slow motion, in which the march of white migration was accompanied by an artillery barrage of microbes that cleared the way.” This phrase implies that the white people knowingly used, to put the implied modern term to it, “germ-warfare” against the native population. White colonist knew no more about ‘microbes’ than the Indians did. He then goes on to accuse the colonist of deliberately obscuring the facts of westward expansion allow “…focus on the beneficiaries rather than the Indian victims.” Ellis uses the language of eastern establishment victim-hood to impugn all things associated with expansion. What choice did anyone have once the Americas were discovered and immigration commenced? Life happens. This section does not enhance his work for this reader. To view this episode through modern eyes with the elitist attitude is not useful to understanding our history. Ellis humanizes George Washington to an admirable extent. Washington is no longer the silent sphinx but is reveled through his letters to be essential to the creation of the Constitution. Washington also appreciated his impact on events. He does not want to waste that impact on losing propositions. The author also helps to illuminate the character and role of John Jay, a founder who has not received much popular recognition. His treatment of Hamilton is consistent with other accepted assessments. Madison is, however , described as both a great political philosopher as well as, when the need arises, a remarkably able and thorough political strategist. Madison’s views on the federal system evolve, from the beginning of the Philadelphia Convention with his drafting of the Virginia Plan in conjunction with his fellow founders prior to the first meeting, through ultimately, the final ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Madison came to recognize that had the provisions he originally demanded been included, the Constitution never would have been ratified by the State Conventions.The chapter end notes are worth the read. Some of them explain the author’s conclusions or highlight exceptionally worthwhile reference works cited. The book provides some insights that parallel today’s political situation. Except for a few, what I consider to be, basic historical errors, this book provides useful and thought provoking information. Do your own fact checking if some assertions seem jarring to you.

One of the most engaging books on the behind the scenes effort of great men with a great vision for a great nation. The pains they took to structure an unobtrusive government accountable to the people to avoid tyranny.

A good book for facts about the critical period and the creation of the Constitution not often seen in the classroom, and useful for understanding the circumstances of the time. Personally, the thesis is weaker than Ellis’ other books, though, and some of the claims could be better read in cross-examination with other sources, especially regarding the ratification period.

In this detailed, scholarly work historian Ellis explains how four figures were instrumental after the War of Independence in forging a federal nation with a constitution of checks and balances. The four, Hamilton, Madison, Washington and Jay (as well as Morris, Gouverneur Morris and Jefferson) used their political convictions and brilliance to push through a federal system on the 13 reluctant states and a disparate population that was more attached to their local interests than to nationhood. The four used Washington's fame as well as political cunning to persuade a majority of nine states to accept a federal system of governance while compromising on states rights and the existence of slavery in the south. Finally, even New York State and Rhode Island signed the new Constitution of the United States of America which ensured that a real nation, not a group of quarreling states, was born. Numerous quotations of letters and conversations support Ellis' interpretations of this dramatic period as well as interesting notes and references to other historians.For a less dry account of this same period I would recommend the very readable and exciting MIRACLE AT PHILADELPHIA by historian Catherine Drinker Bowen.

J Ellis has told me a special story about George Washington and three other people who worked very hard to give to the 13 States a government, superior to each of them, that lasted for almost 240 years and is still going very strong. The various States did not know about that: some grumbled, some adapted without problems, one refused. But the four people overcame all difficulties in establishing a Federation in 1788-89 where earlier there was a loose, useless confederation of single States; at that time the President lasted at most one year and for 3 years couldn't be president again. The four men put that to the end. They established a Constitution that, with changes, improvements from time to time, is lasting since 1789: a miracle, thinking about the original 13 states and how difficult it was to initiate the superstate Nation as they did.

No other document is so revered by Americans than the Constitution of the United States (except the Declaration of Independence perhaps). Few of them may realise that this founding document of the Republic came into being six years after the war against British rule was won. In his famous "Gettysburg Adress" (the third founding document) no lesser man than Abraham Lincoln erred when he spoke of "four score and seven years ago" since the Republic's start. It was more complicated: The USA could have ended as a bickering and infighting political body not unlike Latinamerica or the European Union. Four men were responsible that this fate wasn't met: Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, John Jay and James Madison. Josephl J. Ellis tells their story and he does it with his usual scholarship and very entertaining writing.