Here is an entertaining and informative book for brousing into history from the perspective of a man who shuns the filters of popular culture, and popular revisionist history as well.

Louis gave me this book when it was first published, and I became slowly hooked, one personage and chapter at a time. I had never chosen non-fiction reading for pleasure before. If this taste of personalities and times reaches you, you will want to explore his other publications and judge other historians from a new perspective. I recommend also Crusade Against Slavery, Friends, Foes, Reforms, and compare with One Drop of Blood by Malcomson.

The Muckrackers is probably the most recognized of his works, not to be forgotten either.

This book basically puts forward a theory that the founders just established the Constitution for their own personal economic gain. This book is well-researched, but its premise is totally flawed. Moreover, it tries to portray all of the founding fathers as self-serving and looking out for their own economic interests. It doesn't really explain why some of the wealthiest colonists and statesmen such as George Mason and Elbridge Gerry refused to sign on. Moreover, I'd recommend that any student of the Constitution, study the writings of James Madison and John Adams to answer these charges. I also recommend The Founder's Constitution set, edited by Phillip Kurland and Ralph Lerner. It is an excellent tool for examining original intent.

This book is only recommended for its historical value. The renowned constitutional scholar, Forrest McDonald, does an excellent job introducing this book and debunking its controversial charge towards the Constitution.

Beard's origional thesis form 1913 remains that the forming of the United States Constitution was an effort by the economic well-to-do of the newly formed American social class to establish a government that would protect their interests and raise the value of the government's obligations in their possessions. Beard's goal is simply to re-establish the idea of the aforementioned economic interests as the primary, not secondary cause of the U. S. Constitution. Through a topical analysis of interests, that seem contrary to the work of his historical mentors, Beard weaves his interpretation of the economic history. Throughout his book Beard consistantly refers to his work as fragmentary, but it appears extensively researched through primary documents such as the Federalist Papers, early Treasury Department records, and Madison's convension notes. Beard does an excellent job in presenting all necessary facts for the reader to follow his argument. Little, if any information is left to the supposition of the reader. Whereas the work can be dry at times, it does provide scholars with alternative, not necessarily new, interpretations of early American historical events.

Charles Beard's thesis held sway for decades --and was not attacked in a significant way until after his death in 1948. Major critics were Robert E. Brown (1956) and Forrest McDonald (1958). It should be noted that Charles Beard greatly angered the liberal Establishment in the 1940s with his strong criticism re how Franklin Roosevelt manipulated the US into World War II and provoked the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor.

A new book due out in July 2002 -- Robert McGuire's "To Form A More Perfect Union: A New Economic Interpretation of the United States Constitution" will supposedly show that Beard was right re the Founding Fathers/Constitution and his critics were wrong.