Its peculiar mixture of forms and powers was addressed to that end. Americans chafing under parliamentary high-handedness were confirmed in their belief that explicit constitutional defenses were essential if their liberties were to be preserved, even from representatives of their own choosing. Precisely because of its special and close connection to the ultimate source of political authority, a constitution could rightly claim to be more weighty, more fundamental than any act of ordinary legislation. In developing their case for this position, two of the Founders produced classic statements of constitutionalism. So it was that arguments advanced as grounds of protest and resistance became arguments used directly as grounds for creating new republics.
Nothing lacking that special authorization is entitled to be treated as a foundation.
If the great work of founding were to be done in the right way and with the right results no such shortcuts were permissible. In fact, Massachusetts delayed adopting a new constitution for four years into the Revolution and in the process provided others with a model of founding by special convention and ratification by the people. By this general line of reasoning Britain would be no model at all. Hamilton and Madison, in sharply reasoned statements that precede the writing of the Constitution, took arms against these claims. Both the people and their agents must be restrained from doing just anything they took a fancy to.