4 ms·

I recently tried reading some of the Federalist Papers, but found the writing style too opaque for a casual read (perhaps some of the other authors' are more ac

I recently tried reading some of the Federalist Papers, but found the writing style too opaque for a casual read (perhaps some of the other authors' are more accessible, but then, Hamilton did write most of them). Can anyone recommend some kind of annotated version that's more accessible to a modern reader? These Anti-Federalist Papers seem a bit more accessible, but part of my interest is in understanding the motivation of the writing of the constitution, and it seems there is no better source for that than the Federalist Papers.

SllX 6y ago
The best source is the Constitution, and second to that are Supreme Court rulings. Madison came to the convention with the meat of what would become the Constitution, but the actual language was shaped and clarified by committee. Most of the Federalist papers are the product of Madison and Hamilton, and those are raw, but they are arguments in defense. Given how many were written by Hamilton who had less participation and less effect, I would argue they’re useful arguments for the why of the Constitution, but not the best means of interpreting it. I don’t have any annotated versions of the Federalist Papers I can recommend, but The Heritage Foundation has one of the better web annotations of the Constitution[1]. Scroll through and you’ll find various clauses accompanied with full essays in the little “i” icons. What you may also find helpful is context for the why and the how of the Constitution, as in why did the Articles of Confederation need to be replaced and how did the Constitutional Convention decide to replace them and how they went about replacing them. National Review hosts Constitutionally Speaking[2], and the hosts of the show keep trying to bring it back in various ways but they finished with what they initially promised by the end of Episode 41. [1] https://www.heritage.org/constitution/ https://www.heritage.org/constitution/ [2] https://www.nationalreview.com/podcasts/constitutionally-speaking/ https://www.nationalreview.com/podcasts/constitutionally-spe...
sudosteph 6y ago
I have a copy of "the federalist papers in modern english - indexed for modern political issues" that I used as a companion reference when I first bought the Federalist Papers. It was good for looking up which essays were relevant to my interests, but personally I felt that my comprehension suffered from being a step removed from the primary source when I used the "Modern Language" version. I think there's a lot to be said for having access to the subtlety and tone from the author, even if it takes some time to adjust to the language. The upside is that if you get used to reading texts from this era, other writers of the time period become more accessible as well. For example, I recently read many of the sermons of Jon Wesley and found them to be an easier read than I was expecting, perhaps due to my exposure to the federalist papers and others.

SllX 6y ago

The best source is the Constitution, and second to that are Supreme Court rulings. Madison came to the convention with the meat of what would become the Constitution, but the actual language was shaped and clarified by committee. Most of the Federalist papers are the product of Madison and Hamilton, and those are raw, but they are arguments in defense. Given how many were written by Hamilton who had less participation and less effect, I would argue they’re useful arguments for the why of the Constitution, but not the best means of interpreting it. I don’t have any annotated versions of the Federalist Papers I can recommend, but The Heritage Foundation has one of the better web annotations of the Constitution[1]. Scroll through and you’ll find various clauses accompanied with full essays in the little “i” icons. What you may also find helpful is context for the why and the how of the Constitution, as in why did the Articles of Confederation need to be replaced and how did the Constitutional Convention decide to replace them and how they went about replacing them. National Review hosts Constitutionally Speaking[2], and the hosts of the show keep trying to bring it back in various ways but they finished with what they initially promised by the end of Episode 41. [1] https://www.heritage.org/constitution/ https://www.heritage.org/constitution/ [2] https://www.nationalreview.com/podcasts/constitutionally-speaking/ https://www.nationalreview.com/podcasts/constitutionally-spe...

sudosteph 6y ago

I have a copy of "the federalist papers in modern english - indexed for modern political issues" that I used as a companion reference when I first bought the Federalist Papers. It was good for looking up which essays were relevant to my interests, but personally I felt that my comprehension suffered from being a step removed from the primary source when I used the "Modern Language" version. I think there's a lot to be said for having access to the subtlety and tone from the author, even if it takes some time to adjust to the language. The upside is that if you get used to reading texts from this era, other writers of the time period become more accessible as well. For example, I recently read many of the sermons of Jon Wesley and found them to be an easier read than I was expecting, perhaps due to my exposure to the federalist papers and others.