argumentative essay about gettysburg address

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Why the Gettysburg Address Is Still a Great Case Study in Persuasion

Four lessons from Abraham Lincoln.

Today marks the 150th anniversary of the end of the American Civil War, a war that began on April 12, 1861. It was just a month after the inauguration of President Abraham Lincoln. He had not won a majority vote – far from it. He’d only won about 40% of the popular vote, and some states didn’t even put him on the ballot. He only scraped a victory thanks to a very close four-way race. But despite this unlikely beginning during turbulent times, Lincoln went on to become one of the country’s most revered presidents, and one of its best orators. His best-known speech is, of course, the Gettysburg Address. It’s often studied for its rhetoric, and deservedly so – there are gems of psychological persuasion hidden throughout.

• TD Tim David spent eight years as a magician, and in 2010 was named North America’s Top Mentalist. He’s now a corporate communications consultant and speaker. His book is Magic Words: The Science and Secrets Behind Seven Words That Motivate, Engage, and Influence .

Partner Center

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

The Gettysburg Address

By: History.com Editors

Updated: March 20, 2023 | Original: August 24, 2010

On November 19, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln delivered remarks, which later became known as the Gettysburg Address, at the official dedication ceremony for the National Cemetery of Gettysburg in Pennsylvania, on the site of one of the bloodiest and most decisive battles of the Civil War. Though he was not the featured orator that day, Lincoln’s brief address would be remembered as one of the most important speeches in American history. In it, he invoked the principles of human equality contained in the Declaration of Independence and connected the sacrifices of the Civil War with the desire for “a new birth of freedom,” as well as the all-important preservation of the Union created in 1776 and its ideal of self-government.

Burying the Dead at Gettysburg

From July 1 to July 3, 1863, the invading forces of General Robert E. Lee ’s Confederate Army clashed with the Army of the Potomac (under its newly appointed leader, General George G. Meade ) in Gettysburg, some 35 miles southwest of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania . Casualties were high on both sides: Out of roughly 170,000 Union and Confederate soldiers, there were 23,000 Union casualties (more than one-quarter of the army’s effective forces) and 28,000 Confederates killed, wounded or missing (more than a third of Lee’s army) in the Battle of Gettysburg . After three days of battle, Lee retreated towards Virginia on the night of July 4. It was a crushing defeat for the Confederacy, and a month later the great general would offer Confederate President Jefferson Davis his resignation; Davis refused to accept it.

Did you know? Edward Everett, the featured speaker at the dedication ceremony of the National Cemetery of Gettysburg, later wrote to Lincoln, "I wish that I could flatter myself that I had come as near to the central idea of the occasion in two hours as you did in two minutes."

As after previous battles, thousands of Union soldiers killed at Gettysburg were quickly buried, many in poorly marked graves. In the months that followed, however, local attorney David Wills spearheaded efforts to create a national cemetery at Gettysburg. Wills and the Gettysburg Cemetery Commission originally set October 23 as the date for the cemetery’s dedication, but delayed it to mid-November after their choice for speaker, Edward Everett, said he needed more time to prepare. Everett, the former president of Harvard College, former U.S. senator and former secretary of state, was at the time one of the country’s leading orators. On November 2, just weeks before the event, Wills extended an invitation to President Lincoln, asking him “formally [to] set apart these grounds to their sacred use by a few appropriate remarks.”

Gettysburg Address: Lincoln’s Preparation

Though Lincoln was extremely frustrated with Meade and the Army of the Potomac for failing to pursue Lee’s forces in their retreat, he was cautiously optimistic as the year 1863 drew to a close. He also considered it significant that the Union victories at Gettysburg and at Vicksburg, under General Ulysses S. Grant , had both occurred on the same day: July 4, the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence .

When he received the invitation to make the remarks at Gettysburg, Lincoln saw an opportunity to make a broad statement to the American people on the enormous significance of the war, and he prepared carefully. Though long-running popular legend holds that he wrote the speech on the train while traveling to Pennsylvania, he probably wrote about half of it before leaving the White House on November 18, and completed writing and revising it that night, after talking with Secretary of State William H. Seward , who had accompanied him to Gettysburg.

The Historic Gettysburg Address

On the morning of November 19, Everett delivered his two-hour oration (from memory) on the Battle of Gettysburg and its significance, and the orchestra played a hymn composed for the occasion by B.B. French. Lincoln then rose to the podium and addressed the crowd of some 15,000 people. He spoke for less than two minutes, and the entire speech was fewer than 275 words long. Beginning by invoking the image of the founding fathers and the new nation, Lincoln eloquently expressed his conviction that the Civil War was the ultimate test of whether the Union created in 1776 would survive, or whether it would “perish from the earth.” The dead at Gettysburg had laid down their lives for this noble cause, he said, and it was up to the living to confront the “great task” before them: ensuring that “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

The essential themes and even some of the language of the Gettysburg Address were not new; Lincoln himself, in his July 1861 message to Congress, had referred to the United States as “a democracy–a government of the people, by the same people.” The radical aspect of the speech, however, began with Lincoln’s assertion that the Declaration of Independence–and not the Constitution–was the true expression of the founding fathers’ intentions for their new nation. At that time, many white slave owners had declared themselves to be “true” Americans, pointing to the fact that the Constitution did not prohibit slavery; according to Lincoln, the nation formed in 1776 was “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” In an interpretation that was radical at the time–but is now taken for granted–Lincoln’s historic address redefined the Civil War as a struggle not just for the Union, but also for the principle of human equality.

Gettysburg Address Text

The full text of Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address is as follows:

"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

"Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

"But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Gettysburg Address: Public Reaction & Legacy

On the day following the dedication ceremony, newspapers all over the country reprinted Lincoln’s speech along with Everett’s. Opinion was generally divided along political lines, with Republican journalists praising the speech as a heartfelt, classic piece of oratory and Democratic ones deriding it as inadequate and inappropriate for the momentous occasion.

In the years to come, the Gettysburg Address would endure as arguably the most-quoted, most-memorized piece of oratory in American history. After Lincolns’ assassination in April 1865, Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts wrote of the address, “That speech, uttered at the field of Gettysburg…and now sanctified by the martyrdom of its author, is a monumental act. In the modesty of his nature he said ‘the world will little note, nor long remember what we say here; but it can never forget what they did here.’ He was mistaken. The world at once noted what he said, and will never cease to remember it.”

HISTORY Vault: The Secret History of the Civil War

The American Civil War is one of the most studied and dissected events in our history—but what you don't know may surprise you.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

The New York Times

The learning network | text to text | the gettysburg address and ‘why the civil war still matters’.

Text to Text | The Gettysburg Address and ‘Why the Civil War Still Matters’

American History

Teaching ideas based on New York Times content.

• See all in American History »
• See all lesson plans »

Updated: Nov. 20, 2013

We honor the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address this month by matching it with two opinion pieces that offer opposing perspectives on the legacy of Abraham Lincoln’s famous speech.

In this Text to Text , one author celebrates how far we have come since the Civil War; the other bemoans how divided we still are.

Background: One hundred and fifty years ago this month, President Abraham Lincoln addressed the nation at the site where the Civil War’s deadliest battle had occurred. In just 272 words that took him a bit more than two minutes to deliver, Lincoln declared:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

We suggest two very different perspectives to pair with Lincoln’s famous speech. Robert Hicks in “Why the Civil War Still Matters” considers this year’s anniversary as a testament to how much we have changed as a country. Even more important, he believes the war “sealed us as a nation” and consecrated “the ‘unfinished work’ to guarantee ‘that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom.'”

Charles Blow takes a different view in “Lincoln, Liberty and Two Americas.” He makes the case that “this country finds itself increasingly divided,” and that the growing gap between liberals and conservatives, or rich and not rich, for example, has “geographic contours” that reveal “two Americas with two contrasting — and increasingly codified — concepts of liberty.” He concludes his piece by asking, “Can such a nation long endure?”

Key Questions: What is the legacy of the Gettysburg Address and the Civil War? Does it still matter today?

Activity Sheets: As students read and discuss, they might take notes using one or more of the three graphic organizers (PDFs) we have created for our Text to Text feature:

• Comparing Two or More Texts
• Double-Entry Chart for Close Reading
• Document Analysis Questions

Excerpt 1: From “Why the Civil War Still Matters,” by Robert Hicks

…Does the Civil War still matter as anything more than long-ago history? Fifty years ago, at the war’s centennial, America was a much different place. Legal discrimination was still the norm in the South. A white, middle-class culture dominated society. The 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act had not yet rewritten our demographics. The last-known Civil War veteran had died only a few years earlier, and the children and grandchildren of veterans carried within them the still-fresh memories of the national cataclysm. All of that is now gone, replaced by a society that is more tolerant, more integrated, more varied in its demographics and culture. The memory of the war, at least as it was commemorated in the early 1960s, would seem to have no place. …What meaning does the war have in our multiethnic, multivalent society? For one thing, it matters as a reflection of how much America has changed. Robert Penn Warren called the war the “American oracle,” meaning that it told us who we are — and, by corollary, reflected the changing nature of America. Indeed, how we remember the war is a marker for who we are as a nation. In 1913, at the 50th anniversary of Gettysburg, thousands of black veterans were excluded from the ceremony, while white Union and Confederate veterans mingled in a show of regional reconciliation, made possible by a national consensus to ignore the plight of black Americans. Even a decade ago, it seemed as if those who dismissed slavery as simply “one of the factors” that led us to dissolve into a blood bath would forever have a voice in any conversation about the war. In contrast, recent sesquicentennial events have taken pains to more accurately portray the contributions made by blacks to the war, while pro-Southern revisionists have been relegated to the dustbin of history — a reflection of the more inclusive society we have become. As we examine what it means to be America, we can find no better historical register than the memory of the Civil War and how it has morphed over time. Then again, these changes also imply that the war is less important than it used to be; it drives fewer passionate debates, and maybe — given that one side of those debates usually defended the Confederacy — that’s a good thing. But there is an even more important reason the war matters. If the line to immigrate into this country is longer than those in every other country on earth, it is because of the Civil War. It is true, technically speaking, that the United States was founded with the ratification of the Constitution. And it’s true that in the early 19th century it was a beacon of liberty for some — mostly northern European whites. But the Civil War sealed us as a nation. The novelist and historian Shelby Foote said that before the war our representatives abroad referred to us as “these” United States, but after we became “the” United States. Somehow, as divided as we were, even as the war ended, we have become more than New Yorkers and Tennesseans, Texans and Californians. …True, we have not arrived at our final destination as either a nation or as a people. Yet we have much to commemorate. Everything that has come about since the war is linked to that bloody mess and its outcome and aftermath. The American Century, the Greatest Generation and all the rest are somehow born out of the sacrifice of those 750,000 men and boys. None of it has been perfect, but I wouldn’t want to be here without it.

Excerpt 2: From “Lincoln, Liberty and Two Americas,” by Charles M. Blow

“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.” Those are the opening words of Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, and they seem eerily prescient today because once again this country finds itself increasingly divided and pondering the future of this great union and the very ideas of liberty and equality for all. The gap is growing between liberals and conservatives, the rich and the not rich, intergenerational privilege and new-immigrant power, patriarchy and gender equality, the expanders of liberty and the withholders of it. And that gap, which has geographic contours — the densely populated coastal states versus the less densely populated states of the Rocky Mountains, Mississippi Delta and Great Plains — threatens the very concept of a United States and is pushing conservatives, left quaking after this month’s election, to extremes. Some have even moved to make our divisions absolute. The Daily Caller reported last week “more than 675,000 digital signatures appeared on 69 separate secession petitions covering all 50 states,” according to its analysis of requests made through the White House’s “We the People” online petition system. According to The Daily Caller, “Petitions from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas residents have accrued at least 25,000 signatures, the number the Obama administration says it will reward with a staff review of online proposals.” President Obama lost all those states, except Florida, in November. The former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul took to his Congressional Web site to laud the petitions of those bent on leaving the union, writing that “secession is a deeply American principle.” He continued: “If the possibility of secession is completely off the table there is nothing to stop the federal government from continuing to encroach on our liberties and no recourse for those who are sick and tired of it.” The Internet has been lit up with the incongruity of Lincoln’s party becoming the party of secessionists. But even putting secession aside, it is ever more clear that red states are becoming more ideologically strident and creating a regional quasi country within the greater one. They are rushing to enact restrictive laws on everything from voting to women’s health issues…. We are moving toward two Americas with two contrasting — and increasingly codified — concepts of liberty. Can such a nation long endure?

For Writing or Discussion

• What is Lincoln saying in the Gettysburg Address? What is the significance he sees in the great battle that was fought on that very site? What is he asking of the nation?
• Is this speech still relevant today? If so, how? Can you find something in this week’s Times to which the words or ideas in it might still apply?
• Why does Mr. Hicks say the Civil War still matters? What does he see as the most important legacy of the war?
• What relevance does Mr. Blow see in Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address? Why does he say Lincoln’s words “seem eerily prescient today?”
• Compare these two Opinion pieces. On what points do they agree? Where do they disagree? Cite evidence from the texts to support your answer.
• What do you think is the legacy of the Gettysburg Address and the Civil War? Does the war still matter today? Does the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address show how much our nation has progressed since the Civil War? Does it show how strong our democratic values are? Or does it remind us how divided we still are as a nation?

Going Further

After reading the original speech and the two articles cited above, students can write an argumentative essay using evidence from the three texts to support what they think is the legacy of Gettysburg Address today.

Below, we provide additional resources for further exploration:

1. Disunion: The Times’s Disunion blog provides a trove of essays that revisit and reconsider the Civil War period, such as “The Name of War,” which documents how the Civil War got its name. The blog also features its own Civil War timeline that provides a guide both to relevant Times resources and to the history of the war itself.

The Disunion essay, “What Gettysburg Proved,” by Allen C. Guelzo, feels especially relevant to the text-to-text dialogue between Mr. Hicks and Mr. Blow, and can easily be added as an additional perspective. Here is an excerpt:

… In November, when Lincoln came to dedicate a national cemetery for over 3,500 of the battle’s Union dead, it seemed to him that the willingness to lay down life in such numbers simply to preserve a democracy was all the evidence needed to illustrate democracy’s transcendent value. In their sacrifice, “the brave men, living and dead, who struggled here” had shown that democracy was something more than opportunities for self-interest and self-aggrandizement, something that spoke to the fundamental nature of human beings itself, something that arched like a rainbow in the political sky.

2. Bottomless Treasure: Tony Horowitz offers yet another reason the Civil War is still relevant today that also can be paired with the texts above. He writes:

The Civil War isn’t just an adjunct to current events. It’s a national reserve of words, images and landscapes, a storehouse we can tap in lean times like these, when many Americans feel diminished, divided and starved for discourse more nourishing than cable rants and Twitter feeds.

Writing in 2010, he views the war as a “bottomless treasure” of history, “much of it encrusted in myth or still unexplored,” for us investigate and remember even 150 years later.

3. Images: The Civil War was one of the earliest wars caught on camera. Students can view some of the war’s images in the slide show “The Battle of Gettysburg” and in the Library of Congress’s Civil War catalog . For another way of viewing the Battle of Gettysburg, students can look through two slide shows of this year’s 150th anniversary re-enactments: “A Quest for Authenticity in a Gettysburg Re-Enactment” and “Gettysburg, Readdressed.”

4. The Speech: The Library of Congress’s Gettysburg Address Exhibit provides digital access to the original copy of Lincoln’s address, along with other useful features, such as this video with curator Dr. John R. Sellers and this photograph of Lincoln at the speaker’s platform.

Students can also watch the six minute clip above about the Gettysburg Address from Ken Burns’s documentary, “The Civil War.” And they can read the original New York Times front page article about the event. What was the context for Lincoln’s speech? How was it received at the time? How did The Times report on it?

5. Public Speaking: Generations of children have memorized the Gettysburg Address in school, and recently, the documentarian Ken Burns has asked everyone in America to do the same — and to record themselves on video reciting it. The Times reported on the project , which includes many well-known political leaders and celebrities performing their own renditions. Students can join in as well.

Updated : Here, for instance, is Stephen Colbert’s version:

6. And Public-Speaking Satire: Lincoln’s two-minute speech has set a standard in the history of American oratory for the potential power of public speaking. Peter Norvig makes a commentary on the state of public speaking today in his online satire, “The Gettysburg Power Point Presentation.” Students can consider: What do you think the author is saying about our world today through his piece? Why? (Read more about the making of this spoof .)

Updated: Nov. 20: For more Gettysburg Address humor, students might enjoy New York Magazine’s “How the Media Would Have Covered the Gettysburg Address” if publications like BuzzFeed, Upworthy and HuffPost Celebrity had been around “in olden times.”

More Resources:

Learning Network Resources | Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War

This resource may be used to address the academic standards listed below.

Common Core E.L.A. Anchor Standards

1   Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.

2   Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.

4   Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.

6   Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.

8   Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.

9   Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to compare the approaches the authors take.

Common Core Standards for Mathematical Practice

1   Understands ideas about civic life, politics, and government.

United States History

14   Understands the course and character of the Civil War and its effects on the American people.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

I am disappointed in you Charles Blow. You missed the two key points in Lincoln’s speech.

1-To preserve the first major democracy in 2,500 yrs. 2-To end slavery.

The country will never be “equal” as you point out but Lincoln gave us the tools to continue to strive for it as he also said in this speech and in his 2nd inag. and I am paraphrasing…it is up to us the living to continue the unfinished work and do the right thing as God as given us the ability to see it.

The points you bring up today about two nations are true and important to discuss but are a joke compared to what Lincoln went thru in the Civil War.

You can thank him for that.

Well thought out and relevant to Common Core. However some of the focus questions are very low level. A vocabulary component would be wise for teachers to incorporate

What's Next

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Course: US history   >   Unit 5

• Slavery and the Missouri Compromise
• Increasing political battles over slavery in the mid-1800s
• Start of the Civil War - secession and Fort Sumter
• Strategy of the Civil War
• Early phases of Civil War and Antietam
• The Emancipation Proclamation
• Significance of the battle of Antietam
• The battle of Gettysburg
• The Gettysburg Address - setting and context
• Photographing the Battle of Gettysburg, O'Sullivan's Harvest of Death

The Gettysburg Address - full text and analysis

• Later stages of the Civil War - 1863
• Later stages of the Civil War - the election of 1864 and Sherman's March
• Later stages of the Civil War - Appomattox and Lincoln's assassination
• Big takeaways from the Civil War
• The Civil War

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

Video transcript

The Gettysburg Address

Abraham lincoln, ask litcharts ai: the answer to your questions.

Abraham Lincoln’s Speech “The Gettysburg Address” Essay

Introduction, analysis of the speech, the significance of the speech, works cited.

Lincoln is one of the most renowned presidents of the United States. He was an inspiring leader and his speeches still speak to people’s hearts. Lincoln’s speeches have been used by many people who pursued different goals (Peatman 203). Thus, presidents of the USA, leaders of other countries and even filmmakers often refer to Lincoln’s words (Peatman 203).

One of his speeches used most often is the Gettysburg Address. It appeals to people’s hearts and focuses on the greatest values cherished by Americans. Admittedly, the speech may mean different things to different people. I would like to analyze the speech to understand what it means for me and why it has such an effect on me.

In the first place, it is necessary to note that it quite a brief but very appealing address to the nation. In just one paragraph, Lincoln revealed basic values of democracy. He focused on major values, equality and liberty (Lincoln n.p.). The speech contains many bright metaphors that appeal to people’s hearts.

For instance, Lincoln notes that even though they came to dedicate the cemetery to brave soldiers of the Civil War, they could not “consecrate” the land as the men “living and dead” had consecrated it with their blood (Lincoln n.p.). The President calls the cemetery a “resting place” for courageous soldiers who deserve the rest after their great labors (Lincoln n.p.). Admittedly, these literary devices make the speech memorable and touching.

It is remarkable that Lincoln speaks a lot about the nation. Thus, he starts his speech with mentioning first settlers who “brought forth… a new nation, conceived in liberty” (Lincoln n.p.). The nation and liberty are two central topics in the Gettysburg Address. The President stresses that it is the responsibility of people to protect gaining of their ancestors. The first settlers started the nation cherishing principles of liberty and the Civil War was the period when the nation got “a new birth of freedom” (Lincoln n.p.).

The inspiring leader reminds the great purpose of the horrible Civil War that took lives of thousands of brave men. Importantly, the President does not employ the concept of the country that implies territories and natural resources. He utilizes the concept of the nation, in other words, people who are the primary value for him. This is very important as people are more willing to follow the leader who cares about them, not some lands.

It is also noteworthy that Lincoln uses first person plural. He does not say that somebody has to do something for the nation. He stresses that he and people who are present (as well as the entire nation) have to act and struggle for liberty. Lincoln inspires people as he shows his readiness to act. Therefore, the President is the model and people are eager to follow him.

The brief analyses has shown major characteristics of the speech and it is easy to understand what it means for me and why. In the first place, the speech is a call for action. I believe the speech is a great reminder for people including me. When reading the speech, I become inspired and I am ready to act.

I understand that many people died for what they believed in and I had to contribute to the society that was created with so many sacrifices. Of course, no one asks me to give my life for the nation but I am sure that I will be ready to do a lot to help the nation flourish. When reading Lincoln’s speech, I understand that every American has to think about his contribution to the development of the society instead of simply consuming goods and services. The speech is a call for action for me.

It is also clear why the speech has such an effect. I know that the words helped people reconcile with their losses and brought hope to their hearts. The President mentions sacrifices and justifies them. Admittedly, it is simply impossible to remain indifferent to such a call for action.

Apart from this, the speech is also a reminder of the central value cherished by Americans. Liberty is one of the most important things for a person. I believe the speech is must-read for all in the US society. Admittedly, there are instances when liberties are limited and democracy is not fully manifested even in the US society. There is still racism and prejudice.

However, I think that the speech can remind people of the importance of this democratic value. I guess the speech reveals the essence of the nation as people came to the new world for liberty and freedom from European conventions and restriction.

It is but natural that liberty is what all generations of Americans have valued. Lincoln’s speech reveals this long for liberty and freedom. Therefore, people (especially those in power) have to read the speech every morning before they start making decisions. They have to remember that the nation needs liberty, otherwise, it will cease to exist.

Finally, the speech for me is also a reminder of the great history of the Americans who managed to create such a strong nation. The speech addresses only one episode of the American history but this episode is very suggestive. The USA is the country where people managed to win the battle for their liberties. First, the liberties were mere manifestations in some documents but gradually people managed to bring them to life.

The speech also addresses the major value and the struggle for it. When reading the speech, I personally, think of the Civil war, and the struggle for slavery abolition, the Civil Rights movement and a variety of stories concerning the struggle of people for their rights. I do not think Lincoln could predict how many more people would die before true liberty could reign in the country. However, in his speech he touched the subject and justified people’s sacrifice.

On balance, it is possible to note the speech is one of the brightest examples of oratory as it achieves its aim. It inspires people to struggle for their rights. For me, the speech is a reminder of people’s sacrifice, a brief account of the American history and a call for action. I am willing to contribute to development of the society and I believe that I will make my contribution. I also think I will face certain obstacle and I may even lose hope. However, reading the famous speech of Lincoln will inspire me to act and pursue my goals.

Lincoln, Abraham. The Gettysburg Address . 2013. Web.

Peatman, Jared. The Long Shadow of Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. Carbondale, IL: SIU Press, 2013. Print.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 20). Abraham Lincoln’s Speech "The Gettysburg Address". https://ivypanda.com/essays/abraham-lincolns-speech-the-gettysburg-address/

"Abraham Lincoln’s Speech "The Gettysburg Address"." IvyPanda , 20 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/abraham-lincolns-speech-the-gettysburg-address/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Abraham Lincoln’s Speech "The Gettysburg Address"'. 20 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Abraham Lincoln’s Speech "The Gettysburg Address"." February 20, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/abraham-lincolns-speech-the-gettysburg-address/.

1. IvyPanda . "Abraham Lincoln’s Speech "The Gettysburg Address"." February 20, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/abraham-lincolns-speech-the-gettysburg-address/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Abraham Lincoln’s Speech "The Gettysburg Address"." February 20, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/abraham-lincolns-speech-the-gettysburg-address/.

• Speech of President Abraham Lincoln on Gettysburg Field
• The Significance of the Gettysburg Address Today: The Lessons of the Past That Will Guide People into the Future
• The Gettysburg Battle of 1863
• Lincoln’s "Gettysburg Address" Speech Analysis
• Abraham Lincoln’s Personal Connection in the Gettysburg Address
• The battle at Gettysburg
• Battle of Gettysburg Summary
• Battle Analysis: The Battle of Gettysburg
• The Battle of Gettysburg: History, Strategies and More
• Abraham Lincoln's Public Appearance
• Abraham Lincoln: A Legacy of Freedom
• Barack Obama's Family History
• Dwight D. Eisenhower: World War II Hero and U.S. President
• Benjamin Franklin’s Autobiography and the Key Elements of Representing the Self-Improvement Process
• James Madison’s Leadership Qualities

ISSA Proceedings 2014 ~ Argumentation In Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address

• by: David Zarefsky, Department of Communication Studies, Northwestern University (Emeritus), Evanston, U.S.A.

Abstract : Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address normally is understood as epideictic, intended only to dedicate a national cemetery. In fact, however, an important argument is subtly and implicitly developed in this brief text: that nationalism is necessary for democracy to flourish. This argument will be identified and its layout described. Moreover, Lincoln employs all three dimensions of strategic maneuvering (topical potential, audience demand, and presentational choices) to enhance this argument. Its placement within an epideictic address is strategically useful and illustrates the ways in which epideictic can have argument content.

Keywords : argument structure, burden of proof, coordinative argument, deliberative, epideictic, eulogy, Gettysburg, Lincoln, strategic maneuvering.

1. Introduction Probably no figure in United States history is better known worldwide than Abraham Lincoln, who is taken as representative of the upward mobility Americans value and of the ideals the nation espouses. No speech delivered by Lincoln is better known around the world than the Gettysburg Address. Seemingly a model of simplicity, the Address actually is quite complex/ Seemingly a purely ceremonial address, it actually also presents and develops an argument whose contents are mostly implicit. Seemingly a recitation of communal values, it actually upholds values that are highly controversial. And seemingly transparent in its message, it actually relies on silence, ambiguity, and assertion as means of strategic maneuvering.

This essay is written in honor of the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address in 2013. In what follows, a brief sketch of the context will be followed by an analysis that seeks to unpack the paradoxes noted above.

2. The battle and the speech The battle of Gettysburg, a small town in southeastern Pennsylvania, was fought on 1-3 July 1863. Although not fully evident at the time, it was a turning point of the war. It stopped the bold attempt by Robert E. Lee’s Confederate army to invade the North through Maryland and to threaten the capital, Washington. It thereby meant that the South could not win the war through invasion (although a later attempt at a raid was made) but would need to rely on attrition and war-weariness on the part of the North. But the Northern failure to capture Lee’s army after the battle, allowing it instead to escape to Virginia, meant that the war would not end decisively, certainly not soon.

For the most part, the thousands who died in battle were left where they fell on the ground. Hoping to give the Union soldiers a dignified burial and also to control the stench and disease caused by rotting corpses, a group of private citizens undertook to establish a military cemetery on part of the battlefield. Their efforts, though not complete, progressed far enough for the cemetery to be dedicated on November 19, about five months after the battle.

The principal speaker for the occasion was Edward Everett, former governor, representative, and senator from Massachusetts, former president of Harvard University, former secretary of state, and 1860 vice-presidential candidate of the Constitutional Union Party, one of the four major parties that year. Everett spoke for over two hours and, although he has been ridiculed for its length, his speech was an excellent example of its kind. (The text is readily available as an appendix in Wills 1992.) He verbally recreated the battle from start to finish and celebrated the Union victory. His detailed rhetorical depiction enabled audience members to feel as though they were present for all three days of the historic battle. Everett’s speech was followed by a musical interlude and then Lincoln rose for brief remarks formally dedicating the cemetery – the role he was invited to play. Popular myth has it that Lincoln wrote the speech on the back of an envelope while riding on the train to Gettysburg. This myth was created during the 1880s and has no basis in fact (Johnson 2013). In fact he wrote a draft before leaving Washington and then did final editing in Gettysburg the night before delivering the speech (Boritt 2006).

At only 272 words, the text (Basler 1953, 7:23) is easily accessible; a copy is included in the Appendix. Briefly, Lincoln positions the present moment as part of a war testing the commitment of the American founders to nationalism premised on liberty and equality. It is appropriate, he says, for us to hallow the ground on which the soldiers defending this commitment fell, but in a larger sense we cannot, since the battlefield already has been dedicated through their bravery and sacrifice. What we should do, therefore, is to rededicate ourselves to their ideals and to finish the work on their project.

3. The argumentative character of the speech The speech can be characterized as a eulogy, a genre of epideictic discourse whose functions are to offer praise for the dead and advice for the living. While fulfilling these functions, however, it also implicitly contains a significant argument about what the audience should do.  The major standpoint (1) is the claim, “We should strengthen our commitment to the nation and its founding principles.” This claim is derived from Lincoln’s statement that “it is for us the living . . . to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced,” and the earlier statement that the Civil War is testing whether any nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to equality can endure.

Supporting this standpoint is a three-point coordinative argument structure, featuring the claims that (1.1a) the founders created the nation in liberty and committed it to equality, (1.1b) war tests the endurance of the national commitments, and (1.1c) our role is to rededicate ourselves to the task. The parts of this argument together support the major standpoint and prevent its being circular. The claim about the founders stands on its own, seemingly unchallenged. The claim that the war is a test brings with it the subsidiary claim that Gettysburg is “a great battle field of that war.” A fortiori , if the larger war is a kind of test, then its specific instantiation at Gettysburg is part of that test.

The claim that our role is to rededicate ourselves to the founding principles is supported by a more elaborate subsidiary structure of multiple coordinative arguments. First is the pair (1.1c.1a) “we are here to dedicate a cemetery,” and (1.1c.1b) that, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate a cemetery. The combination of these two statements creates a paradox that is resolved through the claim in (1.1c) that we have a less obvious purpose, namely to rededicate ourselves to the commitment of the founders. The second pair of subsidiary statements is also a coordinative argument, though independent of the first: (1.1c.2a) what we say here will not be long remembered, and (1.1c.2b) we must assure that the dead did not die in vain. If our statements at the cemetery will not by themselves be enough to assure that the deaths were not in vain, then we must do something else to assure that result: we must rededicate ourselves to the task to which they presumably were committed.

Laying out the argument in this fashion helps to make clear what Lincoln accomplishes in this speech. First, he not only consoles the living but directs them in a particular way: toward reaffirming what he claims are the nation’s founding ideals. Second, he portrays this action as a duty by showing that it is the natural progression in a sequence that begins with “our fathers” who proclaimed these ideals and the “great civil war” which is testing them. Third, the steps in this progression are asserted briefly rather than developed in any depth. This may be appropriate in a eulogy, where one does not expect the structural presentation of claims and reasons, but it has the effect of making contestable claims appear as if they are self-evident. Lincoln is taking advantage of the generic expectations of a eulogy in order to reduce his burden in advancing a deliberative claim about what we should do. Fourth, Lincoln adds force to the claim that “it is for us the living, rather, to rededicate ourselves” to the founding ideals by implying that doing so resolves the paradoxes. It is a way out of the predicament that it is appropriate for us to dedicate the ground and yet “in a larger sense” we cannot do so, by offering something we can do that will be at least as good as dedicating the ground. And it offers a way out of the tension between wishing to assure that the dead not die in vain and yet believing that “what we say here” will be “little note[d] nor long remember[ed]”; that is, that our words will not rescue the dead from oblivion. The act of rededicating ourselves to the founding national ideals is thus doubly attractive.

4. Strategic maneuvering Not only does the Gettysburg Address contain the implicit structure of an argument, but it also clearly reflects strategic maneuvering to present Lincoln’s position in the most favorable light. The speech reflects all three of the categories of strategic maneuvering discussed by van Eemeren (2010).

4.1 Topical potential Lincoln’s choices regarding topical potential can be made clear by observing what he elects not to discuss. First, unlike Everett, he makes no mention of the battle of Gettysburg itself – not its progression, not even its outcome. Second, there is no discussion of slavery – unless that is how one chooses to read “all men are created equal,” which probably was not the intended context – and none of emancipation, even though the proclamation had been issued on 1 January and emancipation was recognized as an aim of the war. Third, there is no self-reference to Lincoln himself or to his office.

What all of these silences enabled Lincoln to do was to focus his remarks less on the past than on the future, less on the dead than on the living. Everett’s focus was on the events of 1-3 July; Lincoln’s was on how those attending the dedication could give those events a larger and more transcendent meaning. For Everett, listeners could use the battle by vicariously participating in it and basking in the glory of a Union victory. These were purely consummatory ends. For Lincoln, however, they could use the battle as a stimulus to their own acts of rededication.

The absence of references to slavery and emancipation may be harder to explain, because they are what we perceive the war ultimately to have been about. But Lincoln saw it somewhat differently. Despite his own strong antislavery beliefs, freeing the slaves was not his cardinal purpose in prosecuting the war. That was a means – granted, a necessary means, as he came to see – toward the goal of preserving democratic self-government and majority rule, which had been undermined by the act of Southern secession, especially when that act had no basis other than that slavery’s advocates had lost a lawful and fairly conducted popular election. Lincoln had said in his First Inaugural Address (Basler 1953, 4:262-271) that the essence of secession was anarchy. That was the end to be prevented by victory in the “great civil war,” toward which both emancipation of slaves and the victory at Gettysburg were essential means.

4.2 Audience demand Lincoln also adapted his presentation to audience demand, as is evident in his use of strategic ambiguity. Terms and phrases are used that admit of multiple readings, with quite different implications. For instance, just who are “these honored dead”? Gettysburg was a Union cemetery; no Confederate dead were buried there. Lincoln says as much when he refers to “those who here gave their lives that that nation might live.” But in the next paragraph he refers to “the brave men, living and dead, who struggled here” and “they who fought here.” These phrases are broader in scope and could be taken to refer to both Union and Confederate soldiers. Contemporary audiences often read the speech this way, as a universal tribute to all the fallen, although that reading is not completely faithful to text or context. This ambiguity allows Lincoln to speak to multiple audiences across time. Audiences in 1863 might have been more likely to celebrate the fallen Northerners, whereas after the wounds of war have healed, the speech can be understood by later audiences – say, those of 2013 – as national consecration in memory of all the Gettysburg dead. Since it is constrained within the moment of the battle, Everett’s speech cannot achieve such transcendence.

A similar ambiguity is found in the pronoun “we.” It may refer to all people, both North and South: “we are engaged in a great civil war.” Or it may refer to his immediate audience: “we are met on a great battlefield of that war.” Universal and particular views of “we” interweave throughout the speech. In such a gifted writer as Lincoln, such shifts probably are not accidental. It seems more likely that Lincoln responds to audience demand by regarding his immediate audience both in its own right and as a synecdoche for the entire nation, North and South (those who are only metaphorically “here” at Gettysburg) and also for those not yet even born, who will be “here” when they are in the act of reading or memorizing the speech. In this way, Lincoln raises the audience onto a different and more abstract plane, on which partisan or sectional conflict is out of place and national reaffirmation is appropriate. The fact that he moves back and forth between the particular and the general suggests that the speech should be intended as simultaneously embracing both.

The most obvious example of an ambiguous term is “dedicate.” It is used in the phrase “dedicated to the proposition,” meaning “committed” or “pledged.” But when the president says, “we have come to dedicate a portion of that field,” it means “to designate” or “to set aside.” In the next paragraph he means something different still, as he signals by his comment that he is referring to “a larger sense.” Here he supplies his own synonyms, “consecrate” and “hallow.,” suggesting a meaning such as “to distinguish sacred from profane.” The final uses, referring to “us the living,” return to the original sense of “dedicate” as “to pledge or commit.” What is more, Lincoln’s use of the word “rather” contrasts this sense of “dedicate” with “to set aside” or “to hallow,” which he used earlier.

These shifts in the term’s meaning satisfy audience demand by providing a constructive outlet for audience energy despite the fact that listeners cannot rise to the act of consecration because the soldiers already have done that. If the audience cannot do what they came to do, Lincoln does not send them away with nothing. What they can do, and should do, is to commit themselves to give the nation “a new birth of freedom,” so that it once again is committed to the proposition that all are created equal. By using the same term, “dedicate,” Lincoln implies that his audience’s action is equivalent, at least in value, to what the soldiers did who consecrated the Gettysburg battlefield with their lives.

The last example of strategic ambiguity to adapt to audience demand is the phrase, “the great task remaining before us.” Lincoln does not say exactly what the task is. To be sure, he offers clues in the final phrases of the speech. But is each synonymous with “the great task remaining before us” or is each an element of that task? And how might each of these phrases translate into practical action? To take just one example, it is reasonable to assume that to “take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion” means that the Union must fight on until it wins the war. But to make that meaning explicit would be to stipulate that the war must be ended by military victory, and Lincoln probably would not want to exclude the possibility that the South might simply tire of the struggle. Nor did he want to confirm the perception that he was stubborn and inflexible. This view was held by Northern critics who were themselves tired of the war and were calling for reconciliation with the South without the abolition of slavery. Besides, to call explicitly for Northern victory, even if that is what Lincoln really meant, would make it impossible for the speech to be read then or later as a conciliatory message addressed to North and South alike. The same could be said about what one would do to “highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain,” depending on whether “these dead” refers to the Union soldiers who were buried at Gettysburg or to all who died on either side of the battle. By leaving the matter ambiguous, Lincoln is able to enlarge and unify his audience, thereby fulfilling the epideictic function of the speech.

4.3 Presentational choices The final category of strategic maneuvering is presentational choice – decisions about arrangement and language that advance the purpose of the speech. Several examples can be cited from the Gettysburg Address. To begin with, Lincoln chooses to present some of his key claims as assertions, claims put forward as if they are self-evident rather than standpoints to be justified by argument. A nominally epideictic address such as a dedication speech may be the perfect vehicle for doing so, since a structure of claims and proofs is not normally expected. Instead the speaker typically states and celebrates shared knowledge. Lincoln follows this pattern except that his values and knowledge claims, though stated as if unquestioned, in fact were highly controversial.

For example, Lincoln says that the country was “brought forth” by “our fathers” in the year 1776, “four score and seven years ago.” That was, of course, the year of the American Declaration of Independence, when “our fathers” declared their commitment that all men are created equal. That is one of several possible dates that might have been selected for the national origin, but it was not the only one available to Lincoln. Others included 1765, when the Stamp Act Congress (the first intercolonial body) met; 1775, when the military rebellion began; 1778, when aid from France made the revolution viable; 1781, when the Articles of Confederation were ratified; 1787, when the Constitution was drafted; 1788, when the ninth state ratified it; or 1790, when Rhode Island made it unanimous. To have selected any of those dates would have implied a very different origin story. By selecting 1776 and presenting it as if there were no question, Lincoln locates the country’s beginning in the expression of ideals – and not just any ideals, but those of liberty ad equality, the very values to which Lincoln would have his audience reaffirm their commitment.

Furthermore, Lincoln characterizes the ideal of equality as a proposition. In context, a proposition was a hypothesis that would be tested and proved through the life of the country. It was like a geometric asymptote, something that would be continually approached even though never actually reached. It would serve as a goal toward which the nation always would strive. This was the same view of equality that Lincoln had expressed during his pre-presidential years, when he had attributed it to the founders and used it to resolve the paradox of how slavery could have been condemned by those who themselves owned slaves. The other obvious way out of that paradox was to say that the founders did not regard blacks as men within the scope of the Declaration. This was the view taken, for example, by Lincoln’s perennial political opponent, Stephen A. Douglas. How to choose between these interpretations? Fortunately, one doesn’t have to. By making the presentational choice to state as fact what is a highly contestable assertion, Lincoln is able to define away the controversy and leave listeners with the simple “truth” of what “our fathers” had in mind.

Moreover, what was it to which “our fathers” gave birth in 1776? Lincoln states as fact that they “brought forth, on this continent, a new nation.” But it is questionable whether they did any such thing. The Declaration says that the former colonies “are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states.” The emphasis is on states, plural, and there is no reference to a single nation. Eleven years later, the Preamble to the Constitution announces its aim to “form a more perfect union,” not a more perfect nation. By 1863, it was clear that movement was in the direction of nationalism, of seeing “the people” as a single entity and the nation as its embodiment. But rather than acknowledge that this is a new development or a gradual evolution, Lincoln read backwards and claimed it to be the view of the founders themselves. It was the view of some founders, but Lincoln swept away the whole historical controversy. What the country needed to be in 1863, he said it actually had been all along. This is what Robert L. Scott (1973) called “the conservative voice in radical rhetoric.” It enabled Lincoln to claim that the very same nation had survived for 87 years and was now being tested. To succeed at that test not only would meet the needs of the moment but also would vindicate the vision of the founders. This simple statement that the founders created “a new nation” enacts a theory of history and politics. Stated as a bold assertion, the claim no longer requires any argument.

A final example of assertion as a presentational choice was the statement that the function of the Civil War was “testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.” That is, the war will determine whether democratic self-government, in the United States or anywhere else, is sustainable beyond the 87 years it already has survived. To abandon the war would be to forfeit the test, permitting those who had lost a fair election to overturn the results by military action until they got their way. Doing that would negate the legitimacy of popular elections, and without them there would be no democratic self-rule. If such a thing could happen in the United States, with its tradition and over 80 years of experience, then it could happen anywhere; so if democracy fails here, it fails everywhere. Lincoln puts forward this theory as fact, not needing to argue for it. In the process he obscures other possible accounts for the war, such as the view of many Southerners that military action now was necessary to interrupt the arc of history which, since Lincoln’s election, was tending toward slavery’s demise. Lincoln’s strategic maneuver redirects attention from slavery to the even higher principle of democracy and self-rule, which he pronounces to be the ultimate object of the struggle.

The speech reveals several other presentational choices. The opening line, “Four score and seven years ago,” evokes the Biblical claim, in Proverbs, that “the days of a man’s life are threescore years and ten, or if by reason of strength, fourscore years.” The Union already has exceeded that boundary, so it is on course to “long endure,” provided that there is no successful revolt by dissatisfied Southerners. The persuasiveness of Lincoln’s argumentative claim for a commitment to nationalism is enhanced by its Biblical resonance.

Another presentational choice is the use of negation as an indirect means of providing support. After saying that his audience was present to dedicate a cemetery, Lincoln states that they cannot do so because it already has been done by “the brave men, living and dead, who struggled here.” We therefore must do something else, and Lincoln presents what is a far greater and more important task than setting aside a piece of ground. But rather than saying directly that our task is more significant than theirs, he seems to do the opposite, maintaining that “the world will little note, nor long remember , what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.” The first clause in the sentence was clearly false, but the second clause is true in the sense that doing trumps saying . Since our talk is less significant than their action, we ought to do something else in order to even the exchange and assure that the dead will not have died in vain. Talk plus personal dedication is at least equal to action. But had Lincoln said this explicitly, he would be rightfully accused of hubris. So he made his point by using the presentational choice of negation.

A final example of strategic maneuvering through presentational choice involves the closing prepositions “of,” “by,” and “for,” each of which relates to the noun, “the people.” The point of this closing statement is not the differentiation of the prepositions but the repetition of the noun. “The people” by 1863 was a term of nearly universal veneration, especially when it stood in opposition to terms such as “special interests.” “The people” could be dominated by elites just as they could be ruled by monarchs. The genius of the United States, and its uniqueness in the world, was that the people ruled. Government acted upon them, but also was created and composed by them, and it operated for their benefit. “The great task remaining before us” was to assure the survival of this form of government. That was what was at stake in the war, and that what was what required a new commitment to American nationhood, keeping the people free from the elites that Lincoln thought had hijacked the Southern state governments and led them into the abyss of secession. The case of the United States would prove the viability of popular rule.

5. Conclusion Within the pragma-dialectical framework (van Eemeren 2010), strategic maneuvering offers advocates the chance to increase their rhetorical effectiveness while also meeting their dialectical obligations. On first glance, it may seem that the Gettysburg Address does the opposite: maximizing rhetorical success while evading one’s dialectical obligations. After all, Lincoln never substantiates that the United States is one nation, or that it was founded in 1776, or that its goal is the achievement of equality under popular rule. Even less does he answer objections that could be set out against any of these standpoints. What gives them force is that they are embedded within an epideictic framework that celebrates the dead while urging the living to dedicate themselves to a larger task. It is perhaps in this sense that Wills (1992) wrote that listeners to the speech “had their intellectual pocket picked,” leaving the battlefield on 19 November with a different sense of the United States from what they had when they arrived. It has become commonplace to observe that the Gettysburg Address epitomizes the war-induced shift from regarding the United States as a plural noun (“The United States are.. .”) to a singular noun (“The United States is . . .”).

But this may be taking too limited a view of the matter. The defense of American nationalism did not issue forth from Lincoln at Gettysburg for the first time. He had been striking these themes for some years, at least since the “Peoria speech” of 1854 (Basler 1953). Often he had fully-developed arguments that anticipated or replied to critics, even if he did not reprise them at Gettysburg. In the Lincoln-Douglas debates he argued why the Union was older than the Constitution and perhaps older than the states (Zarefsky 1990). In the First Inaugural Address he had developed the case against secession and explained why the essence of the Civil War was a struggle for popular rule (Zarefsky 2012).

What an epideictic address might do is to evoke the more fully developed argument through allusion to it and restatement of its conclusion. Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958/1969) are right in observing that epideictic has an argumentative character, but it typically achieves that result by indirection rather than explicitly. Analysis of a masterpiece such as the Gettysburg Address helps us to see how. If argumentative structure and rhetorical functions are discernible in such an iconic text as this, then a fortiori they should be even easier to discern implicitly in more quotidian examples of epideictic discourse.

APPENDIX Lincoln’s Gettysburg address, 19 November 1863 Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have cone to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate – we can not consecrate – we can not hallow – this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion – that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

References Basler, R.P., ed. (1953). Collected works of Abraham Lincoln. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press. 8 vols. Boritt, G. (2006). The Gettysburg gospel . New York: Simon and Schuster. Eemeren, F.H. van. (2010). Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Johnson, M.P. (2013). Writing the Gettysburg Address. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Perelman, Ch. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958/1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation (J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver, trans.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. (Originally published in French in 1958.) Scott, R.L. (1973). The conservative voice in radical rhetoric: A common response to division. Communication monographs , 40: 123-135. Wills, G. (1992). Lincoln at Gettysburg: The words that remade America. New York: Simon and Schuster. Zarefsky, D. (1990). Lincoln, Douglas, and slavery: In the crucible of public debate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zarefsky, D. (2012). Philosophy and rhetoric in Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address. Philosophy & rhetoric, 45: 165-188.

You May Also Like

Issa proceedings 2006 ~ the criminal abduction paradox, issa proceedings 2006 ~ a discussion of habermas’ reading and use of toulmin’s model of argumentation, issa proceedings 2006 ~ the rules of the critical discussion and the development of critical thinking, issa proceedings 2006 ~ an analysis of preschool hebrew speaking children’s arguments from the perspective of the pragma-dialectical model, issa proceedings 2006 ~ putin’s terrorism discourse as part of democracy and governance debate in russia, issa proceedings 2006 ~ cultural differences in the persuasiveness of normatively strong and normatively weak expert evidence.

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Email Address(required)

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

ISSA Proceedings

• ISSA Proceedings – What We Talk About When We Talk About…

Proceedings 2014

• Preface by Bart Garssen, David Godden, Gordon Mitchell & Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
• ISSA Proceedings 2014 - Table of Contents

Proceedings 2010

• Preface by Frans van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, David Godden & Gordon Mitchell
• ISSA Proceedings 2010 - Table of Contents

Proceedings 2006

• Preface by Frans H. van Eemeren, J. Anthony Blair, Charles A. Willard and Bart Garssen
• ISSA Proceedings 2006 – Table Of Contents

Proceedings 2002

• Preface by Frans H. van Eemeren, J. Anthony Blair, Charles A. Willard and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – Table Of Contents

Proceedings 1998

• Preface by Frans H. van Eemeren, J. Anthony Blair, Rob Grootendorst and Charles A. Willard
• ISSA Proceedings 1998 - Table of Contents

Random ISSA articles – refresh page to renew

• ISSA Proceedings 1998 – The Improvement Of Teacher Training In Philosophy For Children Through The Pragma Dialectic Approach
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – Discourse Correspondence Between Argumentative And Grammatical Sequences
• ISSA Proceedings 2014 ~ The Argumentative Relevance Of Rhetorical Strategies In Movie Trailers
• ISSA Proceedings 2014 – Karl Popper’s Influence On Contemporary Argumentation Theory
• ISSA Proceedings 2006 – Dialectical Ideal And Dialectical Training
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – On The Pragmatics Of Argumentative Discourse
• ISSA Proceedings 1998 – Is Praise A Kind Of Advice?
• ISSA Proceedings 1998 – Pretending And Port-Royal Logic (Bad Reasoning And Pretend Reasoning)
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – Metadialogues
• ISSA Proceedings 2006 -The Argument Of Print: State Sovereignty And The Publication Of U.S Congressional Debates
• ISSA Proceedings 2014 ~ Argumentative Strategies In Adolescents’ School Writing. One Aspect Of The Evaluation Of Students’ Written Argumentative Competence.
• ISSA Proceedings 2006 – The Argumentative Construction Of Emotions: The Example Of Indignation In Pro-Life Rhetoric
• ISSA Proceedings 2014 – Reasonableness In Context: Taking Into Account Institutional Conventions In The Pragma-Dialectical Evaluation Of Argumentative Discourse
• ISSA Proceedings 2010 – Interpretation And Evaluation Of Satirical Arguments
• ISSA Proceedings 2010 – “I Have Like A Message From God” – The Rhetorical Situation And Persuasive Strategies In Revival Rhetoric
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – Can Testimonies Constitute Proof?
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – Keywords As Passwords To Communities
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – The Accusation Of Amalgame As A Meta-Argumentative Refutation
• ISSA Proceedings 2002 – Coductive And Abductive Foundations For Sentimental Arguments In Politics
• ISSA Proceedings 2014 ~ Argumentation In Bulgarian Political Virtual Forums And Social Networks

Search this site

Like us on facebook.

• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• August 2023
• February 2023
• January 2023
• December 2022
• November 2022
• October 2022
• September 2022
• August 2022
• February 2022
• January 2022
• December 2021
• November 2021
• October 2021
• September 2021
• August 2021
• February 2021
• January 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• September 2020
• August 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• October 2019
• September 2019
• August 2019
• February 2019
• January 2019
• December 2018
• November 2018
• October 2018
• September 2018
• August 2018
• February 2018
• January 2018
• December 2017
• November 2017
• October 2017
• September 2017
• August 2017
• February 2017
• January 2017
• December 2016
• November 2016
• October 2016
• September 2016
• August 2016
• February 2016
• January 2016
• December 2015
• November 2015
• October 2015
• September 2015
• August 2015
• February 2015
• January 2015
• December 2014
• November 2014
• October 2014
• September 2014
• August 2014
• February 2014
• January 2014
• December 2013
• November 2013
• October 2013
• September 2013
• August 2013
• February 2013
• January 2013
• December 2012
• November 2012
• October 2012
• September 2012
• August 2012
• February 2012
• January 2012
• December 2011
• November 2011
• October 2011
• September 2011
• February 2011
• January 2011

©2024 Rozenberg Quarterly - home

Home — Essay Samples — History — Gettysburg — Allusions In The Gettysburg Address

Allusions in The Gettysburg Address

• Categories: Gettysburg

About this sample

Words: 502 |

Published: Mar 14, 2024

Words: 502 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: History

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 746 words

2 pages / 792 words

2 pages / 821 words

2 pages / 945 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Gettysburg

Lasting from July 1 to July 3 of 1863, the Battle of Gettysburg is considered the most important part of the American Civil War. This battle was a Union victory that stopped Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s second invasion of [...]

The Gettysburg Address is one of the most iconic speeches in American history. Given by President Abraham Lincoln at the dedication of the Soldiers' National Cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania on November 19, 1863, it is [...]

Imagine a movie that is suspenseful, historical, and full of action. In 1863, an epic event occurred in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania which was made in to a movie in 1992. This location is now visited by thousands of visitors and is [...]

The Battle of Gettysburg was perhaps one of the most important battles in the Civil War history. Between the days of July 1-3, 1863, the most bloodshed occurred on the battlefield compared to any other fight in the Civil War, as [...]

One of the more impactful means by which the experience of war is recreated for a civilian audience is through the illustration of the human body, with lived experience and relevant literature illustrating war as an entity so [...]

Many people have the misconception that the American Revolution occurred because British colonists did not want to be British citizens any longer. This may have been the case for a select few, but many British colonists desired [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

‘Dimbulb’ Trump Torched After Rambling Attempt To Explain Gettysburg Goes Wrong

Overnight Editor, HuffPost

Donald Trump’s attempt to explain the Battle of Gettysburg took some strange verbal detours ― and his critics were quick to call him out over it.

“Gettysburg, what an unbelievable battle that was. The Battle of Gettysburg,” the former president said at a rally in Pennsylvania on Saturday. “What an unbelievable ― I mean, it was so much and so interesting, and so vicious and horrible, and so beautiful in so many different ways.”

Trump continued:

“Gettysburg. Wow. I go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to look and to watch. And the statement of Robert E. Lee ― who’s no longer in favor, did you ever notice that? No longer in favor ― ‘Never fight uphill, me boys, never fight uphill.’ They were fighting uphill. He said, ‘Wow, that was a big mistake.’ He lost his great general, and they were fighting. ‘Never fight uphill, me boys!’ But it was too late.”

The ramble was made even more surreal when someone just over Trump’s left shoulder began making odd faces midway through:

Trump goes on a weird rant about the battle of Gettysburg and then notes of Robert E Lee that "he's no longer in favor. Did you ever notice that?" pic.twitter.com/hs9GjmCh6K — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 14, 2024

Trump has been prone to verbal gaffes , stumbles and miscues , especially lately .

But even critics on X, formerly Twitter, were left perplexed by his attempt to describe one of the most famous battles in American history:

This is the part where Trump does a mash-up of the Civil War and Pirates of the Caribbean. https://t.co/H8aszJvzwF — Heather Thomas (@HeatherThomasAF) April 14, 2024

Trump: "Gettysburg! Wow!" What a dimbulb. — Stephen King (@StephenKing) April 14, 2024

So @realDonaldTrump Gettysburg was "Beautiful" and "it represented such a big portion of the success of this country." Really? Oh and "Robert E. Lee is no longer in favor"! Do you know why he is no longer in favor? Because he was a damn insurrectionist! On June 7, 1865, Robert E.… https://t.co/VUxRNPfLjR — Michael Steele (@MichaelSteele) April 14, 2024

His utter stupidity has always amazed me more than his psychopathy. https://t.co/X3pU976ln6 — George Conway (@gtconway3d) April 14, 2024

Trump: Gettysburg, what an amazing, horrible, just incredible, classy, terrible thing, really beautiful. I kinda went there, but had the wrong address. Robert E Lee a war hero that wasn’t captured, loser on the hill, but we miss him, really a great guy, believe me https://t.co/CZ0ABdwk1s — Jared Moskowitz (@JaredEMoskowitz) April 14, 2024

Trump, in his bizarro history lesson, has Robert E. Lee saying to his troops "Never fight uphill, me boys," as if he was the Lucky Charms leprechaun. https://t.co/vpkYzPTUsI — James Surowiecki (@JamesSurowiecki) April 15, 2024

“I go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to look and to watch” I wish more people would note how frequently Trump says simple sentences with simple words that are still so utterly crazy that no one in history has ever said them before https://t.co/5bqRXHuFhY — Roger Sollenberger (@SollenbergerRC) April 15, 2024

Trump just gave his own Gettysburg Address. It was incoherent. https://t.co/3G04VaIF3b — davidrlurie (@davidrlurie) April 14, 2024

The man's brain is mush. Imagine thinking this demented buffoon should become the president of the United States. https://t.co/y6FvYJdr4v — Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) April 14, 2024

If we asked Trump which General led Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg, is there any chance he would give the right answer? — Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) April 14, 2024

Civil War historian here anyone who is a fan of the Confederate traitor and enslaver Robert E Lee should not ever be the President of the United States. https://t.co/SkcA8MoL2H — Manisha Sinha (@ProfMSinha) April 14, 2024

Guarantee this is the totality of what Trump knows about Gettysburg https://t.co/p6D2M48QWW — Greg Pinelo (@gregpinelo) April 14, 2024

“Never fight uphill, me boys.” Was Robert E Lee an Irish pirate? https://t.co/OVCxH0IuSD — Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) April 14, 2024

Trump is one of those idiots who asks Gettysburg park rangers if the monuments were there during the battle. — Bob Cesca (@bobcesca_go) April 14, 2024

Donald Trump always talks about history (or, well, *anything*) like a fourth-grader doing a book report on a book he didn’t read. — Mrs. Betty Bowers (@BettyBowers) April 14, 2024

Support HuffPost

Our 2024 coverage needs you, your loyalty means the world to us.

At HuffPost, we believe that everyone needs high-quality journalism, but we understand that not everyone can afford to pay for expensive news subscriptions. That is why we are committed to providing deeply reported, carefully fact-checked news that is freely accessible to everyone.

Whether you come to HuffPost for updates on the 2024 presidential race, hard-hitting investigations into critical issues facing our country today, or trending stories that make you laugh, we appreciate you. The truth is, news costs money to produce, and we are proud that we have never put our stories behind an expensive paywall.

Would you join us to help keep our stories free for all? Your contribution of as little as $2 will go a long way.

Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.

As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.

Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.

Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.

Dear HuffPost Reader

Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.

The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?

The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you’ll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.

Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.

Popular in the Community

From our partner, more in politics.