I had read excerpts and individual papers hitherto - this time I went cover to cover. Some of the papers got a bit windy (Madison, mostly) but overall there's a reason this is considered one of our founding documents. It's that thorough, that well reasoned and well written to justify it's place in history. I think what surprised me most was their prescience - the founders understood that regional differences would lead to civil war if not restrained, and did their level best to prevent it. And while they weren't successful in preventing it, their Constitution provided the framework for recovering from it. This is vital history in the raw. ( )

Just reread the arguments for adopting the new Constitution. I think every American citizen should read these essays -- along with the Anti-Federalist essays and the notes on the debates over the Constitution -- every now and again to remind ourselves of the genius of our system of government. ( )

Several good chapters ( )

Quoting from the preface of this book: "It is supposed that a collection of the papers which have made their appearance in the gazettes of this city, under the Title of the FEDERALIST, may not be without effect in assisting the public judgment on the momentous question of the constitution of the United States, now under consideration by the people of America. . ."

I just finished this book after a long hiatus. It took me awhile to figure out a strategy for reading it, which for me turned out to be reading one chapter a day. Once I approached it that way, I found it to be fascinating, inspiring and eye-opening. Reading it now in the midst of so many debates about the proper role of each of the branches of government as they address domestic and international issues has been very interesting. The thoroughness of the analysis is very impressive. Madison, Jay and Hamilton had such a wealth of historical knowledge that they brought into their discussions, not just about the forms of various governments (ancient and contemporary), but how those forms played out in particular circumstances. One curious aspect of it though is a strange sort of naivete about the honesty and integrity of individuals who would be filling positions in government. Each of the authors goes to great lengths to describe the checks on less than admirable behavior, but at the same time argues that anyone called to any of these positions would have a certain nobility of character that would ensure acting in the best interests of all the people. Time has shown us over and over again that this is not the case. Even with that small contradictory element, I can't recommend this work more highly--I wish I had read it long ago, and would be interested in a reread of it with other folks. ( )