The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although you did not include any references or texts, we can comment on the following.
My brief description would be this one.
One major difference between Beard’s and Berkin’s historical interpretations of the drafting of the United States Constitution is the perspective from it was written. Each of the historians considered different points of view.
Here is why.
In the case of historian Charles Beard, he expressed in "An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States" (1913), that the framers of the US Constitution had economic interests as the priority when the document was drafted. They were so interested in protecting privacy rights and never compromise the economy of the people.
On the other hand, in the case of historian Carol Berkin, she commented in "A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the American Constitution" (2002), that the founding fathers drafted the Constitution they focused on solving the many problems left by the English crown. They used their experience to protect the new country to protect it from a tyrant.
1. The major difference between Charles Beard's and Carol Berkin's interpretations of the drafting of the Constitution arises from the emphasis placed on the ideas that influenced the drafting of the Constitution.
Charles Beard stated that the drafting of the Constitution was to serve the economic interests of the wealthy. After all, only men of wealth were present at the Continental Congress or Constitution-drafting Convention.
On the other hand, Carol Berkin stated that the Constitution-drafting solved political problems that threatened the new nation. She noted that the first ten amendments aimed to crush oppositions of the Constitution.
2. The historical event that supported Beard's interpretation was the efforts to frustrate slaves from gaining freedom, a principle enshrined in the Constitution.
3. Similarly, Berkin's interpretation was supported by all the first ten amendments, including the Shay Rebellion that triggered the jettisoning of the Articles of Confederation and the drafting of the new Constitution.
Thus, the major interpretation difference between these two political historians lies in how they perceived the purposes of the Constitution.
Related link: brainly.com/question/24514547
