Works Cited

Primary Sources: 18

Bailyn, Bernard. The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Anti-federalist Speeches,
Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification: Part One, September 1787-
February 1788. Fifth. New York City, New York: Literary Classics of The United States,
inc., 1993.

This Source is another edit and collection of primary sources, including speeches and
documents from the federalist and anti-federalist parties. It contains both public, and
private entries such as letters. The editor and collector of all of these primary sources,
Bernard Bailyn, is a Harvard graduate and professor and received the honor of presenting
at the Jefferson Lecture, which the highest honor available for achievement in the study
of Humanities. The vast collection of sources in this book makes it highly credible and
shows both sides of the argument surrounding the ratification of the Constitution. The
reason to distort would be to win over the opinions of the other delegates voting on the
constitution, but having both sides of the argument makes it a more credible source, and
overall this collection of primary sources makes it authoritative.

"Constitutional Topic: The Federalists and Anti-Federalists." The US Constitution Online. Ed.
Steve Mount. Steve Mount, 1995. Web. 9 May 2010.
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_faf.html.

Constitutional Topic: The Federalists and Anti-Federalists is an online article, which

discusses the process of ratification, the arguments for and against the Constitution, and
the aftermath of the Constitution. Steve Mount, the editor of this article, shows state by
state how the process of getting the Constitution ratified happened, and explains what the
Federalists and Anti- Federalists thought of it. Mount also mentions informational
primary sources that were written in reaction to the Constitution, like an anonymously
signed letter from the Anti Federalist Papers, which points out main flaws in the
Constitution, one of which was concerns about the power Congress has to raise an army
whenever they saw fit. Steve Mount's extensive knowledge on the subject and references
to primary sources and direct quotes from important people involved in the making of the
Constitution make this source informational and credible.

“Debates in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on the Adoption of

The Federal Constitution.” 1788. The Constitutional Society. 2 May 2010.
<http://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_ma.htm>.

The Debates for Ratification of the Constitution in Massachusetts were one of many
taking place in the United States all over 1788 and 1789. These notes, written word for
word during the Massachusetts constitutional debates of 1788, paint an accurate picture
of what citizens of Massachusetts thought of the constitution. Massachusetts is a northern
state, so the delegates had different views on the constitution then in the middle or
southern states. The debates in Massachusetts give a very large part of a whole. After
reading these debates, one can make accurate generalizations about some of the conflicts
in the debates for ratification.
“The Debates in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Virginia, on the Adoption of
The Federal Constitution.” 1788. The Constitutional Society. 2 May 2, 2010.
<http://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_va.htm>.

The Debates for Ratification of the Constitution in Virginia, like all of the other debates
in the states, show the opinions of a part of America in 1788 and 1789. Virginia is a
mixture of a southern state and a middle state. The debates, shown here, give an idea of
how citizens of Virginia viewed the new constitution as they attempted to ratify it. These
debates, along with the other three annotated state debates, give an accurate picture of
what Americans thought about the Constitution as it was being ratified.

“The Debates in the Convention of the State of New York, on the Adoption of the
Federal Constitution.” 1788. The Constitutional Society. 2 May 2010.
<http://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_ny.htm>.

The Debates for Ratification of the State of New York give an idea of what Americans in
the Middle states thought about the Constitution. These debates highlight views on the
Constitution not held in the north or south, but in the middle of the country. This source,
along with three other sources from different geographical regions of the United States,
show the sum total of what all Americans thought about the Constitution in 1788 and
1789. This source, along with the other three, will be very helpful in making
generalizations about how those in the United States perceived the Constitution.

“The Debates in the Convention of the State of North Carolina, on the Adoption of the
Federal Constitution.” 1788. The Constitutional Society. 2 May 2010.
<http://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_nc.htm>.

The Debates for Ratification of the Constitution in South Carolina highlight how
Americans viewed the Constitution in the South. Being a southern state, people in South
Carolina will have different views on the constitution then those in the northern or middle
states. This source, used congruently with three other state debates from different
geographical regions of the United States, shows how different Americans viewed the
Constitution before it was ratified. While the debates in South Carolina are just a part of
the whole of America, when used with three other sources of the same topic, they
accurately represent how America viewed the constitution before it was ratified.

The Federalist Papers-Hamilton-Madison Hamilton, Alexander, John Jay, and James Madison.
The Federalist Papers. 1st. 1. Cutchogue, New York: Buccaneer Nooks, 1992. Print.

The Federalist Papers by John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison are a series
of 85 essays advocating the ratification for the constitution. The essays outline the
thoughts and processes that went behind the ratification of the constitution, they were
aimed at shaping the way people interpret the constitution, now and in the future. The
source was written to become public to help pass the constitution, which would also
provide a reason to distort because the reason for them to be written is to help influence
opinion on the constitution. The Two primary authors, Alexander Hamilton, and James
 Madison, are in history, both considered founding fathers of the country. Hamilton served
as the secretary of the treasury and as a personal aide to Washington during the
revolutionary war. He proved himself a credible and honest source. The book is a primary
source, written by men who were all at the debates involved in the ratification of the
constitution. Given through the reputation of the authors, the fact that they were all
involved in the debate for the ratification one may conclude this source is an authoritative
source.

Gerry, Elbridge. "Letter Containing the Reasons of the Hon. Elbridge Gerry, Esq., For Not
Signing the Federal Constitution." Letter to Samuel Adams, James Warren. Elliot's
Debates. Vol. 1. Ashland: Ashbrook Center, 2006. Teaching American History.
TeachingAmericanHistory.org. Web. 9 May 2010.
http://www.teachingamericanhistory.com/ratification/elliot/vol1/gerry.html.

Elbridge Gerry was one of the three men who refused to sign the Constitution. In this
letter, written to Samuel Adams (President of the Senate) and James Warren (Speaker of
the House of Representatives), explains he believes the "liberties of America were not
secured by the system." Gerry believed the people of America were not represented in the
Constitution, and pushed for a Bill of Rights. He saw the Constitution more as a set of
rules for the nation, rather than a document, which would help unite it. One can conclude
that this source is reliable and authoritative because of Gerry's thought out points, and the
fact that this source was written during the time period in which the Constitution was
being ratified.

Hamilton, Alexander. "Federalist Essays on Deliberation of the Constitution." Reproduced in

History Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI:
Gale. http://galenet.galegroup.com.ezproxy.bpl.org/servlet/HistRC/

The Federalist Essays on Deliberation of the Constitution is a series of essays written by

Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. Their goals with these essays are to
convince the American people to ratify the Constitution. They try to say that the
Constitution is necessary to the American government and people, for it will hold the
nation together. This relates to our thesis because it is in response to the reaction of the
Anti-Federalists, as the great conflict of ratification continues. This shows how there
were many people for and against the Constitution, which led to conflict in America.

Hamilton, Alexander; Jay, John; Madison, James. Taylor, Quentin P. The Essential Federalist.
Madison, WI: Madison House Publishers, Inc., 1998.

The Essential Federalist is a compilation of excerpts from a multitude of Federalist

documents. Quentin P. Taylor brings together parts of different Federalist papers, and
unites them by topic. He then offers a synthesis of that topic, explaining how it pertains to
the Constitutional debate as a whole. While the raw Federalist papers can be very
beneficial, The Essential Federalist offers an already organized and easily referenced
way to look at The Federalist Papers. Quentin P. Taylor is an associate professor at
Roger State University. He has a Doctorate in Political Science and a Masters in History.
Because he did not major in American History, but political science and world
history, The Essential Federalist offers a different perspective on The Federalist
 Papers then one would get from a synthesis written by a history professor. This new
point of view offers an exciting new way to look at the Federalist Papers, not through the
eyes of a historian, but through the eyes of a political scientist. One can therefore
conclude, based on not only the credentials of the author, but also from the different point
of view of the author, that The Essential Federalist is both an authoritative and credible
source.

Madison, James. Notes on the Debates in the Federal Convention.1787. The Avalon Project. 10
April 2010. <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/debcont.asp>.

The notes of the debates of the Federal Convention are a primary source, written by
James Madison, detailing the proceedings that led to the final writing of the Constitution.
These debates are the only record of the preceding of the Constitutional Convention in
Philadelphia during the summer of 1787. James Madison strove to accurately present
what happened during that time spent in the Philadelphia Courthouse. Many secondary
sources say that James Madison's notes present a very clear view of the proceedings.
Neither James Madison nor the founders every intended for a record of their proceedings
to become public, so these notes present some of the most honest views of the delegates
who wrote the Constitution. The website which presents these notes is called The Avalon
Project, a database for primary documents in history. The Avalon Project is known for
presenting a primary source unaltered from the original document that it was printed on.
One can therefore conclude that these notes of the debates of the Federal Convention are
a very reliable primary source.

Madison, James. "Bill of Rights Transcript." Charters of Freedom - The Declaration of

Independence, The Constitution, The Bill of Rights. National Archives and Records
Administration, n.d. Web. 11 Apr 2010.
<http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html>.

This source is a written version of the Bill of Rights. While the website does not include
an author, it is a government website, so one may conclude that the author is reputable.
The document is a primary source, and the topic of our research, there is no reason to
distort since the bill and amendments would be the things that would shape the way the
individual saw its rights. There were many sources in drafting the Bill on account of it
was voted in by congress, it was written in the intention of running the country and is
therefore public. Being the topic of our research directly, it can be viewed as an
authoritative source.

Rakove, Jack. Founding America: Documents from the Revolution to the Bill of Rights. New
York: Barnes & Nobles Classic, 2006

Full of primary sources, and with commentary by a Harvard Ph.D. professor, this book is
very helpful to our research. This book has many documents from the Revolution to the
Bill of Rights. It gives us a perspective of different people’s views on the Constitution,
including many letters of objection and agreement about the Constitution.
Roland, John. Madison, James. “Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787.” Debates in the
Federal Convention. April 10th, 2010. http://www.constitution.org/dfc/dfc_0000.htm

These notes, written by James Madison during the Federal Convention of 1787, describe
what went on during the meeting in which the Constitution was created. Madison
provides a day-to-day summary of events happening in the Convention, whether it is who
was present at the meeting or what problems were encountered during the creation of the
Constitution. Since these notes were taken by a person who was actually present at the
convention, this is a primary source, thus boosting it's credibility, but could also be
considered as biased, as Madison was a Federalist and had different views on the
Constitution than many other Americans. However, his first hand experience and careful
attention to detail make this source believable and informational.

Roland, Jon. “Patrick Henry Speeches.” Apr. 3, 2003

Constitution.org. May 9, 2010. http://www.constitution.org/afp/afp.htm

During the debate for ratification of the Constitution, Patrick Henry,

one of the leaders of the Anti-Federalists party, made a series of
speeches throughout the year of 1788. With comments from Jon
Roland, a graduate form the University of Chicago and the President of
the Constitution Society, this is a reliable and authoritative source.
Patrick Henry discussed many topics, including the dangers of a too
powerful central government, as it took the rights away form the
people, the need for a Bill of Rights, and other controversial topics
around the Constitution.

Roland, John. "Speeches of Speeches of Melancton Smith." Anti-Federalist Papers. Constitution

Society, 20/12/2003. Web. 9 May 2010.
<http://www.constitution.org/afp/msmith00.htm>.

This primary source is a collection of the five speeches given by Melancton Smith. They
were given at the constitutional convention, most of them in response to the Federalist
speaker, Hamilton. The editor would have no reason to distort the speech, but the
speaker, Smith, does. He may distort something of the truth in his speech, but it’s this that
provides some insight on the Anti-Federalist party. This source is obviously public, and a
primary source. The fact that this source is primary, and that it was given to the delegates
at the Constitutional Convention gives reason to determine this authoritative source.

Slonim, Shlomo. "The Federalist Papers and the Bill of Rights." Constitutional
Commentary 20.1 (2003): 151+. Academic OneFile. Web. 9 May 2010.
<http://find.galegroup.com/gtx/retrieve.do?contentSet=IAC-
Documents&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&qrySerId=Locale%28en
%...lin_m_bedhigh&docId=A116225853&docType=IAC>

“The Federalist Papers and the Bill of Rights” is a scholarly article published in the peer
reviewed Constitutional Commentary periodical, address some of the major topics in the
Federalist Papers and how they led to the Bill of Rights. It writes about the three men
who created the Federalist Papers, and their views on the Bill of Rights, as featured in
 The Federalist Papers. From this article, a very specific view of the Federalist Mindset
can be surmised. This article allows the reader to understand the Federalist Party as a
whole. Because this comes from a peer reviewed scholarly journal, one can deduce that
this is both an authoritative and credible source.

Smith, Melancton. "The Call for Amendments." Reproduced in History Resource Center.
Farmington Hills, MI:
Gale.http://galenet.galegroup.com.ezproxy.bpl.org/servlet/HistRC/

The Call for Amendments is written by a federal farmer in 1788. Melancton Smith, the
federal farmer, says that the people’s rights are not accounted for and that a Bill of Rights
was needed for the American people to be free. He says that the Constitution does not
protect the affairs of the American men and a Bill of Rights would secure the affairs. This
relates to our theme because the main reason the Anti-Federalists were against the
Constitution was the fact that the public affairs were not secured and that it had too much
central power. When the idea of a Bill of Rights came from people such as Melancton
Smith, many Anti-Federalists agreed to ratify the Constitution.

Secondary Sources: 18

Bailyn, Bernard. Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Harvard University Press.
1992

This source is an excerpt of Bernard Bailyn’s Ideological Origins of the American

Revolution. Bernard Bailyn is a Harvard graduate and a top professors in the history
department of Harvard, which makes this a credible source. This excerpt describes the
many reasons why the Anti-Federalists were opposed to the Constitution and why they did
not want the Constitution to be ratified. They had much opposition, but their main
disagreement with the Constitution was that The Constitution gave the government too
much power. It also talks a little about the strategy the Anti-Federalists had in order to stop
the ratification. Also, it has the responses the Federalists had to each of the Anti-Federalists
compliant and action.

Belz, Herman. "History, theory and the Constitution." Constitutional Commentary 11.1 (1994):
45-64.Academic OneFile. Web. 18 Apr. 2010.

From the Scholarly Journal of American History, Herman Belz, who is a well renowned
professor at University of Maryland, comments on the analysis of the scholars Karl
Llewellyn and Edward S. Corbin, as the show how some people took a loose
interpretation of the Constitution, while many took a more strict interpretation of it. The
two different interpretations caused great conflict within the Government on how to
understand The Constitution. Many believe that some can be interpreted, but not all of it
because some of it is the expressions of people’s will and is a very strict interpretation.
Berkin, Carol. A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the Constitution. Orlando, FL: Harcourt, Inc, 2002

A professor of American history, having a Ph.D. at Baruch College and has written many
other novels about American history, wrote this book about the drafting of the
Constitution, as well as the fight for ratification. It explains the debates and controversies
over the Constitution. It explains many arguments about every part of the Constitution.
Also, it explains what both Federalists and Anti-Federalists did to promote Constitution
and stop it from being ratified. It has plenty of information on how it was drafted, and the
great controversies that were evident during the convention, but not as much on the battle
for ratification.

Berkin, Carol. A Brilliant Solution. New York, NY: Harcourt, Inc., 2002.

A Brilliant Solution, by Carol Berkin, Discusses the debates and controversies

surrounding the creation and ratification of the Constitution. It mainly focuses on the
Philadelphia Constitutional Convention, and the arguments and counterarguments
surrounding each Article of the Constitution. A Brilliant Solution shows how the
Constitution was revolutionary for its time, and what different parts of America wanted to
come out of this new document. Carol Berkin is a professor of American History at
Baruch College and a professor at the graduate center at the City College of New York.
She has written several other works about early American history and has a reputation for
presenting unbiased syntheses of the topics in her books. The sources used to created A
Brilliant Solution are mainly primary, although several are secondary. One can conclude,
based on the author’s credentials and the sources used in creating this book, that A
Brilliant Solution is both credible and authoritative.

Bernstein, Richard B., and Kym S. Rice. Are We to Be a Nation? The Making of the
Constitution. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1987

This textbook is by Richard Bernstein and Kym Rice. Richard Bernstein is a Harvard
educated author with over fifteen books on the subjects of the constitution, constitutional
ratification, early leaders in the American push for the constitution, and other topics in
the field of American history. Kym Rice does not have many past credentials other than
this book and a book on early American taverns; therefore a conclusion on her authority
cannot be reached. This is a secondary source, with a collection of primary sources and
notes from the author. And of course this is a public source, meant to be released and
read by scholars looking for insight on the ratification of the constitution. Again the
author is not presented with any reason to distort, and one may conclude this to be an
authoritative source.

"Constitution of the United States: Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists." Law Liberty: American Law
and Legal Information. Web. 9 May 2010. <http://law.jrank.org/pages/5603/Constitution-
United-States-FEDERALISTS-VERSUS-ANTI-FEDERALISTS.html>.

The article "Constitution of the United States: Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists” describes
all of the events from the beginning of the Constitutional Convention to the Bill of
Rights. It explains the Anti-Federalists’ main arguments opposing the Constitution,
including the strength of the central government and the lack of a Bill of Rights. It also
 explains some of the actions of the Anti-Federalists in order to prevent the ratification of
the Constitution. It also explains the Federalists arguments for the Constitution, including
the Federalist papers. Ultimately, most of the Anti-Federalists agreed to ratify the
Constitution once the Bill of Rights was proposed.

Edling, Max M. "Constitution, Ratification of." Encyclopedia of the New American Nation. Ed.
Paul Finkelman. Vol. 1. Detroit: Charles Scribner's Sons, 2006. 305-309. Gale Virtual
Reference Library. Web. 9 May 2010.

This source is a secondary, and public source. It is an entry into the scholarly
journal Encyclopedia of New American Nation. The article provides more insight on the
ratification process, and explains more clearly some of the political ideas
of the constitution and clearly outlines the processes, and reaction to the processes that
happened in the time period. The source proves to be authoritative, with the author, Max
M. Edling having written many books on the topic of the constitution, and the editor Paul
Finkelman an award winning historian, and professor at a number of distinguished
schools. The article lists over ten other sources, and has no reason to distort, which allows
for the conclusion that it is an authoritative source.

Elkins, Stanley; McKitrick, Eric. The Age of Federalism. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press, Inc., 1993.

The Age of Federalism, by Stanley Elkins and Eric McKitrick, is a broad synthesis of the
happenings of the American Republic from 1788 to 1800. While many of the topics
discussed in The Age of Federalism do not pertain to the specific topics of this
bibliographers project, the book does offer a great deal of information on the political
climate of America in the late seventeen hundreds, information which can be used in
reference. The authors of The Age of Federalism are both esteemed historians with strong
reputations. Stanley Elkins has written many books on early America and is an emeritus
professor at Smith College, and Eric McKitrick was an emeritus professor at Columbia
University. Their book, The Age of Federalism, received the Bancroft Prize, an award
given to outstanding works pertaining to American History. From the credentials of the
authors, and the notability of the book, one can conclude that The Age of Federalism is
both a credible and authoritative source.

Elkins, Stanley M., and Eric McKitrick. The Age of Federalism. New Oxford University Press:
New York, 1993

This book describes the history of the Federalists, and some relations between the key
federalists. Another secondary source, written by Stanley Elkins and Eric McKitrick.
Elkins, a Columbia graduate, has written two books on the topic of American history.
This particular book won the Bancroft prize from Columbia University. With his
education, and his award winning novel Stanley Elkins proves to be an authoritative
author. The co-author McKitrick has a similar educational past, and one other novel again
about American history. A public source directed towards professionals and historians
with no reason to distort the truth, this book may be classified as an authoritative source.

Freedman, Russell. In Defense of Liberty. New York: Holiday House, Inc. © 2003
 In his book In Defense of Liberty, Freedman takes the reader through the process in
which the Constitution was created, starting as far back as the American Revolution, and
ending with the amendments included in the Bill of Rights. Freedman focuses clearly on
making the book interesting and exciting, a key element, which made this book catch my
eye. Excellent facts such as direct quotes from delegates present during the Convention
and a step-by-step way to go through the Bill of Rights combined with clear vocabulary
and sentence structure makes this book usable by people of all ages. An author of over 50
books, Freedman is a well-trusted and much admired writer.

Kennedy, David. Bailey, Thomas. The American Spirit: United States History as Seen by
Contemporaries. Wadsworth Publishing. © 2001

The American Spirit: United States History as Seen by Contemporaries is a broad book,
focusing many important events in American History, but has an informational chapter
on The American Constitution and Articles of Confederation. The chapter ranges from
Shay's rebellion to debates during ratification in the states. Kennedy and Bailey both
former professors at Stanford, cover all events that happen during the process of the
Constitution in this book. Strictly factual, The American Spirit: United States History as
Seen by Contemporaries helps one see exactly certain people's reactions to both the
Articles and the Constitution, and the outcomes of both these important documents.

Levinson, Sanford. Our Undemocratic Constitution. New York: Oxford Press, Inc. © 2006.

Levinson begins his book with a powerful opinion, that "the U.S. Constitution is radically
defective in a number of important ways." Levinson, author of five books, receiver of
degrees from Duke, Harvard, and Stanford, and a well-known professor, is recognized for
his critiques of the Constitution. Calling it "extraordinarily undemocratic", Levinson
argues that many of the Constitution's principles "promote unjust or ineffective
government." Throughout his book, the author not only lists what principles are unjust or
undemocratic, he argues as to how the Constitution is the nation's most important
document, yet at the same time is the most difficult document in the world to amend.

The Bill of Rights-Milton Meltzer, Milton. The Bill of Rights. 1st. New York City: Harper &
Row Publishers inc., 1990. Print.

The book The Bill of Rights written by Milton Meltzer traces the history of the
amendments to the constitution. The book of course, was written in the intention of being
published and therefore is a public source. The author wrote this book for people
researching the Bill of Rights and would be presented with no reason to distort the
history. This source is a secondary source, and based on the research of someone else.
The author, Milton Meltzer was educated at Columbia University and has written over
100 books on American history. With his education and number of books receiving the
Laura Ingalls Wilder Medal for his lifetime work and is obviously a qualified author. The
fact that this is a book by a qualified author, with no reason to distort may allow one to
determine this a credible source.

Morgan, Edmund. The Birth of the Republic 1763-89. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1992
 Descriptions of the founding of this country from 1763-89 are found in this book. It has a
detailed description of the problems that led to the Constitutional convention, the
Constitutional convention, and the battle for ratification. IT talks about the main
controversies that the people at the convention had while trying to write the Constitution.
It also talks about all of the strategies the Federalists did to convince people to ratify the
Constitution, and the strategies Anti-federalists used to stop the ratification. Then, it
explains only a little about the Bill of Rights, which we need more information about.

Pole, J.R. The American Constitution: For and Against The Federalist and Anti-Federalist
Papers. New York: Hill and Wang, ©1987.

Historian J.R. Pole ties follows multiple debates and arguments centered on the
Constitution, from its creation to its eventual effect on the political parties of America.
Pole ties together multiple ideas in his novel, such as the connection between state and
national government, and the overall structure of the Constitution. A famous historian,
Pole has taught at colleges such as Oxford, Berkeley, and Princeton, and is seen by many
as a valuable source. The American Constitution: For and Against the Federalist and
Anti- Federalist Papers provides great insight to the many debates and arguments stirred
up by the Constitution.

Reed Amar, Akhil. America’s Constitution: A Biography. New York: Random House Inc.
©2005

America's Constitution: A Biography, written by Yale graduate Akhil Reed Amar, is a

novel describing not only what principles lie in the Constitution, but why they were put
there and what effect they had on the nation. Amar starts by describing the making of the
Constitution, why it was created in the first place, and explains the true importance of the
Preamble, the start to perhaps the most famous document in our nation's history. He then
discusses each piece of the Constitution, explaining where the founding fathers drew their
ideas from, and what they aimed to achieve with each sentence they put in the
Constitution. Online reviews by readers of the book call it informational and a
worthwhile read, for Amar provides a new perspective on the Constitution. His point of
view challenges readers to look deeper into the Constitution and to ask themselves
"Why?" instead of just learning information. This source is both credible and
authoritative because of Amar's past reputation as a historian and his unbiased point of
view.

Staloff, Darren. Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson: The Politics of the Enlightenment and The
American Founding. New York: Hill and Wang; a division of Farrar, Straus, and Giroux,
2005.

Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson: the Politics of the Enlightenment and the American
Founding is about how the foundation of America was influenced by the Enlightenment
period in European History. This source gives both biographical information about the
founders and a better understanding of the revolutionary ideas that influenced the
Constitution. This book can be used to comprehend the roots of the intricacies of the
 ideas surrounding the debates for ratification. Darren Staloff, the author, is an associate
Professor of History at the City College of New York and at the Graduate Center of the
City University of New York. He has written several other books about and many articles
in scholarly journals about early American history. From the credentials of the author,
one can conclude that this book is both credible and authoritative.

Wilentz, Sean. The Rise of the American Democracy. New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, Inc., 2005.

The Rise of the American Democracy is a Broad context book highlighting the history of
America from its Foundation to Lincoln. While only part of this book can be used for the
history fair project, the book offers yet another view on the years in which the
constitution was ratified. It offers an opportunity to see the debates for ratification again,
but from one more perspective. Sean Wilentz, the author of The Rise of the American
Democracy is the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus Professor of History at Princeton University.
For this book, he received the Bancroft Prize. From his credentials and the reputation of
this book, one can surmise that this source is both Credible and Authoritative.