Patrick Henry-"Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!" - Part 1 of the American Documents Series - a podcast by Christy and Garry Shriver

Patrick Henry-"Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!" - Part 1 of the American Documents Series

 

Hi, I’m Christy Shriver.  And welcome to the How to Love Lit Podcast. 

 

I’m Garry Shriver. We’re glad you’re joining us, if you enjoy our work, please consider supporting us by giving us a five star rating on your podcast ap, such as apple.  Also, consider texting your favorite episode to a friend.  That’s how we grow. 

 

 Today, we begin a three part series where we explore three historical documents that have fallen into the American literary canon, not only for their historical importance, but also for their literary excellence. 

 

As the history person, I get very excited when history and literature overlap- and today’s speech is an incredible example of literature changing the world.

 

Yes- that’s right.  Today, we are going to analyze Patrick Henry’s Speech to the Virginian Convention- clearly a persuasive writing piece.  Next week we’re going to look at the Declaration of Independence, and finally, we’re going to read and discuss the Constitution of the United States of America- primarily from a literary perspective.  I’m very excited to explore these works, not just because they ae famous, but because they are rhetorical.  As we’ve discussed, a lot of my teaching instruction centers around the analysis of rhetoric and these works are some of the very first in the American Canon- they are foundational but I don’t say BEST, because honestly, America has produced some really remarkable and important pieces of rhetoric.  We’ve already featured Frederick Douglass and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, but that’s not even the tip of the iceberg.  There is a lot that has gone into the American conversation over the last 200 years, so Garry, since we’re starting at the beginning- which I guess we’re not- we’re onbly starting 200 years ago, but start us 200 years ago with the migration of European peoples to the Americas as our starting point, how do we get to Patrick Henry?

 

The tide of migration from Europe to North America, is only one occasion of the restless movements of mankind on this planet we all share.  Of course, just on this podcast, we’ve looked at the Greek spirit as well as the Roman spirit, most notably represented through the person of Julius Caesar.  But, of course, world history is the story of this progression- if you want to call it that- all over the globe.  What stands as unique in the North American case, and something that was highly unusual, is that the thousands who came to the North American colonies did not only come here to exploit and conquer in the name of the Motherland- although that happened here too- there is little doubt. But strangely, most of the voluntary immigrants, did so because they did not like the country they came from nor many of the patterns of life that had evolved there. 

 

In the beginning they were the offscouring of European society whose condition was so bad that moving to a wilderness settlement was a better option.

 

They came to create a new political and religious world- and although the North American story is not a story of perfect people doing perfect things- it’s often bloodly and sad- but what has emerged here after many years of stuggle-  has become a notable success story for many on planet earth.  The ideals that developed over the last 300 years have elevated the quality of life for millions that today call the United States home.  So we want to take the next three weeks to explore three foundational documents that set in motion a system of government that is the basis for the oldest continuous working democracy in the world- today we’re going to look at Patrick Henry’s fiery speech before the Revolutionary war at the Virginia convention.  Next week we’ll read through the Declaration of Independence and lastly we’ll look at to the Constitution. 

 

Yes- When we think of exploration around the world, or at least me as I was brought up studying the colonization of Brazil and then last week as we saw with the Conquistadores- but I know this is also true for migrations to the African continent- we think of European developers looking for resources from other lands and and taking them back to Europe.  For example,  in the case of the Brazil, most colonizers were men employed by companies.  They wanted gold, wood and other natural resources.

 

Well, don’t think that didn’t happened in North America too because that’s part of our story too.  Four of the 13 colonies in North America owed their origins to trading companies.  The English, the Dutch, the Swedes all christened settlements that eventually became colonies.  So we have that.  We also have this unusual religious foundation that we don’t commonly see in other colonizations movements.  And in the case of this part of North Americs- it was the most influential faction.  There were at least 20,000 pilgrims alone who came over in this group.  I know lots of people are familiar with the MayFlower Compact, that very famous document of the pilgrims of Massachusetts.  But Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Hampshire sprang directly from religious congregations.  Besides the religious settlements we have Georgia which was founded as a place to send prisoners- mostly those in prison for large amounts of debt- and then five colonies were proprietary- that means the King of England just gave some very important person a colony.

 

Wow- so we have a bunch of Europeans coming to a place they didn’t know existed for all kinds of different reasons and end games.

 

Yes- by modern standards, it’s a very messy start- and there’s things to say about that because for all of us we have a lot of healing that must take place on a worldwide scale which makes looking at these documents relevant to us even today.  But in the American story, that is the beginning of the European migration although not by any means all of- There is the small but significant immigrants who paid their own way.   Most in this group were small farmers- but if they paid their own way- they had to be wealthy.  Many likely had a stake in life back in the old country.  Then there were the much much larger working groups: slaves and indentured servants.  Indentured servants would be the tens of thousands who borrowed money for their passage and then worked it off once they got here.  In the proprietary colonies: the proprieters needed people to work their property and offered inducements to get people to come and basically work for them.  In Pennsylvania, for example, it’s estimated that 2-3rds of all immigrants before the revolution were indentured servants.  Being a bond servant was not good- you were treated like property- for sure- however, it was not involuntary servitude  because no matter how awful your master was- and many were-, you always knew, one day you would be free. 

 

This of course, is very different from those who came here as slaves.  In the beginning this was actually mostly white people.  Men, women and children would be  kidnapped off the streets in London and brought here.  In 1627, over 1500 English children were recorded to have been shipped to Viriginia alone.  This is very much like modern slavery today- it was criminal and unsanctioned.  During this same time period, they were only beginning to develop the slave trade from Africa.  In 1650, Virginia had 300 African slaves in the entire colony.  Of course, that was clearly getting ready to change when slave traders began to understand how profitable that trade could actually be.  By the beginning of the American revolution this number would blow up to over half a million of African slaves, and in the South the slaves nearly equaled or exceeded the number of whites.  But there was slavery in every colony- even in New England, one in 50 people were black slaves.  This involuntary servitude was legal and sanctioned.  And hard for us to even visualize or even wrap our brains around.

 

What about our native populations here in America.

 

Well, there is not much positive you can say about that. No knows how many indigenous people were living here in those days.  We do know today there are over 570 registered indigenous populations and another 300 plus that are not registered but still exist today spread out across the American landscape.  Historically, there have been a few highlighted incidents of friendships between the native populations and the incoming European settlers, notably Squanto and Samoset teaching the pilgrims the way of the wild;  William Penn had a positive relationship with native peoples, but as we look back, this story is bloody and painful. Again thid idea of healing from historic trauma is important and in large part comes from understanding history.  There are actually a few historic documents from indigenous populations that have made their way in the North American canon, like the Iroquois constitution or the Great Law of Peace that would be interesting to do in podcast, even though most were originally oral narratives.

 

Of course,  that’s a great idea.  This is where, history and literature become intertwined and complex. 

 

Yes- that’s very true.  And it really takes eyes of grace to see the world as it existed through the eyes of those who lived in it.  Most immigrants coming to America were marginalized people in Europe- they had no safe place- think about why most people immigrate today- you’re escaping persecution- political, religious, economic, personal.  America was a place- not uninhabited, but for lots of people- that simply didn’t matter-- you have to remember that for almost all of human history, planet earth is barbaric- just watch Game of Thrones or read any stories from anywhere in the ancient world.  So,it’s helpful to look at history and historical documents from an evolutionary standpoint- we are all a species desperate for survival- that’s instinctual- and the colonists were one group among an entire planet of groups engaged in the business of survival: conquering, building, struggling.  This particular group we’re highlighting were primarily English by language, literature, law and religion. The majority of these coming to America were religious dissenters, critics, not friends of the Church of England and were under the crown.  Most were not really political people- but even that language is modern.  There is really no way to be a political person on a planet where there is no political choice. 

 

In the case of most peoples during the time period we’re looking at, there was a feudal system in Europe and you were born into a social class with very little hope of moving up in social class.

 

Since 1215 The English have been slowly moving towards constitutionalism- an idea we will explore in this series. The Colonials have inherited this English  tradition and combined it with a wilderness frontier society who’s survival was always at risk.

 

 

However, in this particular case, as we see history develop in the Americas, the monarch was far away- in America if you were a newly freed bondservant or a free man or any kind, you were pretty lucky.  You had to be self-reliant to carve out a place in this wild world or you would literally die. But at the same time- you didn’t have anyone controlling your life- your destiny- so to speak. Of course, not all peoples here were free- and this, as we all know, will come to a breaking point, and of course- as we mentioned, the story of indigenous peoples will be devastating- but for persecuted Europeans looking for a shot- America was basically unsupervised.  Free trade existed nowhere on earth-, but it did in America. No one could control it.  This wild wide open environment created a unique culture where a new idea was launched into the world- this idea we would be an American version to the French idea of liberty.  It will turn out to an evolutionary and strange idea and in many ways unnatural and impossible to actualize. 

 

It’s this idea- that it’s possible that there might be a way to construct a set of perimeters, agreed upon principles where individuals could be in charge of their own destiny- no class system, no caste system.  It would encompass self-government, self-mastery, self-control, duty, personal responsibility and honor.  It would promise that people could peacefully have a say as to the destiny and direction of their lives- and they said this was an entitled gift from a transcendental God- regardless of man’s allegiance or even belief in this God.  Of the 6000 years of human history- to this point on the globe- this had never happened- not like this.

 

So, is the American revolution a story of a perfect people building a utopia? No, it’s amateurish to even nod to that idea.

 

Is it the story of monstrous people building a system to systematically destroy our planet?  It’s not that either. Here is where you have to let go of your arrogance of the present.

 

 It’s the story of human genius- it’s not fiction. The historian William Andrews calls it a Promise with a Paradox.  The ideal of liberty the founders would say, is divine.  A young Alexander Hamilton from Barbados would say, “The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records.  They were written as with a sunbeam in the whole volume of human destiny by the hand of divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”  The implementation of this ideal, unfortunately, would be done by mere mortals- and it’s struggle is ongoing.  The mission would be “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” for all people.  It became a driving force that was always controversial.  The founding fathers themselves as they extolled these values often questioned everyone’s commitment to them.  We also know from their private writings that most were very much aware of the contradiction in terms they living- they knew things weren’t equal for everyone- and most of the contradictions they couldn’t even see . 

 

Well, that’s normal- most of us most of the time can’t see our own contradictions. A country which is a collection of so many different voices- as we see all the time- can never agree on anything or see everything- and that’s assuming everyone only good motives- which of course, is not possible.- it’s just so very hard to build, and it’s so very easy to destroy. 

 

But it does happen, and I would suggest, that the American story is one where we can see the evolving definition of this concept of liberty be honed generation after generation . 

 

If you take nothing else away from today’s podcast you have to at least grasp the concept of Liberty.

 

It has cost incalculably but many people have found here place to build a home, raise a family have life in safety here- so- in humble fashion- and looking for the good and not insisting on the perfect- Christy- should we start with our first American document-

 

Yes- I think so, so- Patrick Henry’s speech at the Virginian Convention-  Let’s set it up and then we’ll read it.  Who’s Patrick Henry- the man?

 

He’s a native born anglo-American- born and raised in backwoods of Virginia- living that basically unsupervised life in that open range you talked about, hunting, farming and eating off the land.  He did not have any kind of formal education.  He was taught by his father to read and write but by all accounts he was a poor student.  At the age of 19, he married 16 year old Sarah Shelton called Sallie, and they started married life where he’d have six children with her before she died a very tragic death while her husband was governor of Virginia- not uncommon for the time period- but that’s jumping ahead.  Henry was not a great farmer nor business man- and long story short he became a lawyer basically by lack of options- although he only had something like a six week course on the subject of lawyering

 

- things have changed a lot in that department.

 

For sure.  But this ultimately is where he found his place and ultimately finds himself involved in politics with the infamous stamp taxes.  There’s a lot to say about this, but we don’t have near enough time to discuss all this, but it comes back to this- the American immigrants had gotten used to a lot of freedom and wealth building.  And now, years later, over 160 years later, the British Government wanted to try to restrict and make the Colonial economy submit itself to the authority of the empire. Isn’t this the theme of Star Wars?

 

Would be oversimplying to say, it’s like kid who never had a curfew all of a sudden is told to come in by 10pm? 

 

What Henry did in Virginian was to write seven resolves- basically laying out what was unfair about this arrangement.  This leads to his making speeches in the Virginia house of burgesses laying out the argument as to why the Americans should tax themselves and make up their own laws.  These ideas will show up in The Declaration of Independence too.

 

 He’s obviously very very persuasive and becames somewhat well known.  

 

Indeed, basically The stamp act became impossible to enforce and was repealed in 1766-but Henry was convinced that America couldn’t survive in a relationship with Britain.  The speech we’re getting ready to read is his argument for what I tell students will become the precursor  for the most famous break up letter in America- the Declaration of independence.  He gave it on March 20, 1775 at the second of five Virginia Conventions convened to decide if Virginia would join other colonies to defy British Rule.

 

Keep in mind the confrontation at Lexington and Concord in Massachusetts will occur a few weeks after this speech. Side note – Massachusetts is a northern colony founded on congregationalism, which is a precursor to self-rule. Virginia is a southern colony lead by a wealthy aristocracy. The wealthy aristocracy were the most resistant to Henry’s speech.

 

 Henry was a radical-an extremist for his time.  For good reason, it is dangerous for a colony to try to defect from the motherland.  This speech is eloquent, and the reason why we’re interested in it today is first because not only did it did change the minds of the Virginians- but also, it served as kind of a guiding philosophy for this new definition of liberty that was taking hold in the Americas.  Henry  finished his speech with this now famous phrase “Give me liberty or Give me death”, and as he delivered the word death- he picked up an ivory letter opening and plunged it at his chest.   The packed church just sat in total silence for a long time.  The emotional reaction was so strong, one man asked to be buried at that spot because of it- and he actually was in 1810.   More people were listening to the speech through the open windows than were even in the church. I do want to say, that we actually don’t know if every single word that we read today is original.  His actual transcript has been lost, and what we have is a transcription from someone else, but most historians have agreed, it’s more than likely pretty close. 

 

Before we read Henry’s words there are two absolutely indispensable ideas you have to keep in mind. If you don’t then this speech loses it’s power. Those two ideas you have to understand are Liberty and Freedom.

 

Liberty comes from the Latin word libertas, which means  “unbounded, unrestricted or released from constraint.”  Libertas even contains the idea of being separate and independent.

 

 

English word Freedom can trace its roots to the Germanic or Norse word Frei, describing someone who belongs to a tribe and has the rights that go with belonging.

 

They did not look at Independence as a quest for new Liberties but a revolt against a government bent on taking their Liberties away. Liberty is who they were.

 

Shall I start- and I’ll start reading through first paragraph

 

Okay- if we’re going to look at this speech through the lens of what consists of powerful rhetoric- the first thing I notice is that he is going to go out of his way to show respect for his audience who he expects to disagree with him on almost every point.  He doesn’t use the tactic that if you are a good person you have to think like me.  He doesn’t use name-calling; he doesn’t degrade his political opponents- it’s the opposite- he calls them “worthy gentlemen”.  He even concedes the point that he may be considered disloyal to his country and even God for what he’s going to say…but he asks them to open their minds just enough to conside- then he lays into them. 

 

Yes- his argument, after all the kind words at the beginning, gets very emotional. Notice how he’s going to reference Odysseus being deceived and seduced by Circe.  He’s also going to throw in some Bible references- but ultimately and listen for this- his argument is something we should all do when evaluating anyone’s words- he says this- ignore everything the British say- and pay attention to what the British are DOING.  Their words and actions don’t match- and when you feel like people’s words and their actions don’t match- go by the actions not by the words.  This is sound logic.  Christy, read it for us.

 

Read through”British ministry have been so long forging”

 

He develops this logic through a series of rhetorical questions.  And really by using questions he makes these points way more emotional.  We can really see this through the next section.  Garry, why don’t you take a turn being Patrick henry.

 

Ok- read through …there is no longer any room for hope

 

 

He’s chronically the things, from his perspective, they’ve tried to do to make this relationship work.  They’ve petitioned, demonstrated, begged, he uses the visual imagery he says, “weve prostrated ourselves before the throne’ of course implying so much humility. 

 

Yes- but even before that- look what he highlights the British are doing- the British have increased the presence of soldiers on the American continent, they’ve sent over more ships.  And he asks, why would they feel the need to have so many soldiers and weapons and then you get this emotional language’ THEY ARE MEANT FOR US! THEY CAN BE MEANT FOR NO OTHER.  THEY ARE SENT OVER TO BIND AND RIVET UPON US THOSE CHAINS WHICH THE BRITISH MINISTRY HAVE BEEN SO LONG FORGING.

 

It’s very emotional langusge- but if you follow his logic you have to arrive at his conclusion.  Basically, while we’re talking and trying in good faith to make a deal- they’re beefing up their guns.

 

Yes- and if you believe that you must decide what you want to do- and for Henry- he sees it very clearly.  He is going to lay out in clear language- we must fight.  However, that’s so much easier said than done.  Just ask any peoples who had tried to stand up to the Brritish Empire.  It had the most deadly technology, it had the largest armies, it was the best funded military in the world.  So, it’s not something to take lightly and he knows that.

 

Yes- and the rest of this speech is a refutstion to what he knows is the most obvious criticism- of- well, it’s all easy to talk like thsat but what cn we do. 

 

Read through- I repeat it, sir, let it come.

 

Yes- he’s going to list several reasons why they should fight.  The first reason is- we better attack early because if we want any longer it’s just going to get worse. 

 

To me that’s not very compelling- even if it is true.  It could be bad now and then just get worse. 

 

For sure- that’s when he goes metphysical.  He’s going to basically make this argment- God is on our side.  We have the moral high ground here.  Our interpretation of liberty is not made up by man, but a divine right given by God, and since God believes in human liberty- he will fight for us in order to achieve it.

 

That is a very presumptive and bold argument. 

 

Well, it is, and it is one that you could not make unless you knew your audience.  He knew every person in that crowd believed in God- to some degree.  So, it’s a philosophical and theological argument that would require great faith to really act on. 

 

True- this idea- that the other guy is bigger, but I know I have God- like in the story David and Goliath.

 

Exactly- and I think Patrick Henry, knows although these kinds of arguments can be very moving because we all want to believe God’s on our side- it’s not something he can totally rely on. So, his final argument is practical.

 

Very practical- he’s going to say- besides- you can’t avoid it.  They are already fighting up in Boston.  You’re getting dragged into this one way or the other- so what side are you going to be on.  In this section, the emotion is really at its apex.  We’ll see rhetorical questions, you’ll see this metaphorical language as we talks abut the chains clanging on the plains of Boston.  A person with an ear for poetry can hear him use a lot of the sound devices like  repetition, alliteration, assonance and consonance that we see guys like Percy Shelley using.  Submission and slavery- alliteration, clanging on the plains- assonance- let it come, let it come- repetition.  Plus, he goes back to those Biblical references- this phrase, ‘peace peace- but there is no peace comes straight out of the New Testament of the Bible.”  The phrase “The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone” is a reference to Old Testament promises.

 

And of course, this final paragraph is so famous and so emotional- he pulls out all the stop

 

Read the last paragraph

 

And there you have it-. Give me liberty or give me death.  Usually, We would call this an either/or fallacy or a false dilemma- it’s when you say- there are only two options- you either have this oneone or you have this other one but that’s it- we hear this all the time- you’re either with me or against me- so to speak.  Usually that’s totally bogus.  Because there’s a range of options in the world- narrowing things down to only two- is almost always not true.  But Garry, in this case- is this a logical fallacy or is he right- you’re either for the revolution or you’re for slavery?

 

And that was the question every single person in these colonies had to decide.  Was it or was it not a false dilemma?  History will tell us that, he made his case and Virginia, after three more conventions, agrees with him and joins the revolution.  But of course, that’s just the beginning and we’ll talk more about that next week when we discuss the great break up letter- the Declaration of Independence. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Further episodes of How To Love Lit Podcast

Further podcasts by Christy and Garry Shriver

Website of Christy and Garry Shriver