This discussion was taken from http://www.gdg.org/dtlincol.html (Lincoln at Gettsyburg), which is no longer extant.
Jeff Wissot: In his book Lincoln at Gettysburg, Garry Wills offers an interesting perspective on history. Lincoln's insight to the purpose of preserving the Union, and the very concept of a republican government, can be seen by an evaluation of the Gettysburg Address only if the reader is aware of Lincoln's second inaugural speech. In the magnanimous second inaugural, Lincoln spoke, "Let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves..."
Consider this one haunting reference at Gettysburg: "The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract." With, perhaps, the exception of this one phrase, all of Lincoln's references to soldiers were seemingly directed only to Union troops -- "those who here gave their lives," "they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced," "what they did here," "these honored dead." Did Lincoln pay a very subtle tribute to the Confederate, as well as the Union dead at Gettysburg? "The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here,..."
As Garry Wills so skillfully demonstrates, in contrast to the "real" Gettysburg Address (Edward Everett's two hour oration) Lincoln makes NO use of specific names, nor does he once reference "the enemy," or the constitution, sectionalism, slavery, specific battles, armies, or even the word Gettysburg. Lincoln spoke only in concepts, the spirituality of the nation. His "few appropriate remarks" would ultimately redefine democracy in America, applicable to Americans in Texas, as well as Maine.
I wonder, in this ONE sentence, did Lincoln, perhaps, pay tribute to the great American "struggle" without specific reference to the Union dead? Did Lincoln, so subtly, honor the fallen Americans on BOTH sides of the battlefield in this contest to find America's truth. It is that word "struggle" that causes me to ponder the question -- as if one struggles with his conscience -- the grave internal conflict of a civil war. The "struggle" of a child entering the world is evident in Lincoln's imagery of the birth process, of a "nation conceived in liberty," and having "a new birth of freedom."
It was Lincoln, perhaps alone, who fully appreciated from the onset, that the war was between Americans, and NOT the Union and its "enemy." Lincoln's famous "Greely Letter," his First Inaugural Address, and particularly the magnanimous gestures toward reconciliation in his Second Inaugural Address give rise to my speculation that the Gettysburg Address was the "transitional statement" of his first and second inaugurals.
Dennis Lawrence: The entire speech was a tribute to the American dead - Union and Confederate, and there was nothing subtle about it. As you say, a look at Lincoln's other Civil War speeches support the contention that Lincoln included the Confederate dead in his funeral oratory at Gettysburg. He bookended the war with sentiments that can only be construed as inclusive of the south.
"We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies " - First Inaugural "With malice toward none and charity toward all." - Second Inaugural But, more importantly, he included the North in the blame for the war. In one of the most remarkable acts of honesty by any politician Lincoln accepted the complicity of the north in slavery and thus placed the blame for the war equally on the North and South.
"Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom offences cometh'. If we suppose that American slavery is one of those offences which in the providence of God must need come... and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from the attributes which the believers in a Living God ascribe to him?" - Second Inaugural.
If indeed, the offences "must need come" to both North and South, then it would be consistent for Lincoln to view the dead at Gettysburg not as Confederate and Union, but as the "woe due" God from both sides for those offences. Hence - "those brave men living and dead who fought here have consecrated" the ground literally as payment for these shared offences. Phillip Paludan in his book on Lincoln's Presidency says that Lincoln always believed that the only way to end slavery was to save the Union and conversely the only way to save the Union was to end slavery. The two were inseparable.
Viewing the three speeches in this light, I believe it is proper to conclude that at Gettysburg -as he had done before - Lincoln spoke to reconcile both northerners and southerners because both were necessary to save the Union. What kind of "new birth of freedom" would exclude southerners (or blacks to extend the remarks)? I am confident that when Abe spoke at Gettysburg he spoke to all Americans, and included all the dead.
Norm wrote, "I don't think he [Lincoln] was a hypocrite or a faker. But he couched his moral insights in language that would reach a population that was, in most respects, quite sincere in its religion. That is not necessarily the language he would have chosen as a private man and a philosopher." Actually Lincoln's private philosophy and thinking seems to match that of his public addresses. This meditation below [Meditation on the Divine Will, September, 1862] was written for himself shortly after hearing of the defeat at Second Bull Run.
The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both _may_ be, and one _must_ be wrong. God can not be _for_, and _against_ the same thing at the same time. In the present Civil War it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party - and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are the best adaptation to effect his purpose. I am almost ready to say that this is probably true - that God wills this contest, and wills that it shall not end yet. By his mere quiet power, on the minds of the now contestants, He could have _saved_ or _destroyed_ the Union without a human contest. Yet the contest began. And having begun He could give the final victory to either side any day. Yet the contest proceeds.
Jeff Wissot: Since religious beliefs weigh heavily on both sides of battle lines, I suspect that anyone who offers his life in combat for causes of humanity, ascribes to beliefs on a higher plane. Of course, without the intervention of Divine Providence (battlefield results are hardly acceptable evidence), we have little to justify our actions and behavior than man-made monuments, statues, and speech tributes to those causes. Of issues so monumental to mankind, as those contested at Gettysburg, we feel compelled to attach religious beliefs.
Such is the "spirituality" of Gettysburg, as demonstrated by Americans from Maine to Texas. It transcends all culture, ethnicity, race or religion in nobility. Lincoln's "few appropriate remarks," offers us the most reverent insight. Perhaps that was Lincoln's unique greatness, to rise ABOVE religion, to an even higher plane of spirituality.
Dennis Lawrence: Politics seems to have been the overriding reason for the gathering at Gettysburg. Linoln saw the invitation as a great opportunity to use the pulpit over the dead to hammer home his ideological belief about America. The local politicians saw it as a chance to gain points in the bitter local political scene, almost dooming the cemetery.
John Blair: The point as it relates to Gettysburg is that it is the Civil War that changes United States from plural to singular. Therefore, it is the Civil War that created the singular country called The United States of America. Remember that in the beginning of the war it was the states, North and South, who equipped their troops. "Their troops" that is, the troops of the various states. Remember, too, that in 18th and 19th century parlance the word "state" was used as we use the word "country" or "nation" today.
It seems plain to me that Lincoln's address and most of his other writings, because they did not berate the South, helped to bring us together after the war. I might be on thin ice here as I'm sure it can be argued that only the intellectuals would have given much attention to the Address after the war. Everybody else was busy building a "new" country, that is a new nation.
Dennis Lawrence: Being somewhat of a political junkie I would like to approach this issue from a purely political standpoint. Let's look at the situation at hand-after 3 years of bloody fighting no end is in sight to the war. Even Horace Greely has gone from "Onward to Richmond" to "Let the Wayward Sisters go". Lincoln is facing serious challenges in the 1864 election. In light of all this he goes to Gettysburg to give a speech that he knows (due to the already public fascination with the "Battle of Gettysburg") will get wide coverage.
He gives the speech and as Willis points out he submits the proposition that the basic building block of our country is "all men are created equal". As Wills points out Lincoln is embracing the Declaration of Independence - not the Constitution as espousing the idea upon which our country is based on. From a political standpoint one must ask why?
Surely the reason was not to emphasize the importance of the UNION remaining intact. Were this true, the Constitution's "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union" would have served his purpose much better than the Declaration's " That all men are created equal". I would agree with Wills that the only conceivable reason that Lincoln embraces the Declaration is to work the slavery issue into the equation. The Constitution after all not only condones slavery but makes it a constitutional right!
Of course then the political junkie in me asks why? Why would Lincoln want to bring up the issue of slavery with the election fast approaching. it would not appear to be in an effort to solidify his base - by 1863 his anti-slavery, abolition credentials are well-established. In fact the issue has the potential to do him more harm than good (witness the NY Draft riots and the negative editorials written after his speech).
I would submit that the reason Lincoln works slavery into the equation is not so much domestic policy but foreign policy. I think the Gettysburg Address, in additions to being a moving eulogy for those who died there, was a not so subtle reminder to Britain that to support the South was to support slavery. In fact I think there is ample evidence that if not for the issue of slavery Britain would have recognized the South as an independent nation. As McPherson notes in his "Battle Cry of Freedom" the first southern commissioner to Britain reported back "the public mind here is entirely opposed to the Government of the Confederate States of America on the question of slavery.... The sincerity and universality of this feeling embarrass the government in dealing with the question of our recognition".
Thus I submit from a political standpoint it was necessary for Lincoln to frame the war as a struggle for equality of all man (as from a political standpoint it was important for the South to frame the war in terms of "states rights"). As long as Britain perceived the war as a struggle over slavery the chances of their entering on the side of the South is very small. Obviously the war goes much better for the North if Britain stays out and obviously the better the war goes the better Lincoln's chance of reelection.
John A. Leo: I did some research about 12 or 10 years ago to estimate the impact our Declaration of Independence had on its intended audience, the established Nations of Europe. After a reasonable amount of digging, I came up empty handed. I just couldn't find any references to the D of I theme or to the document itself. About 8 years ago, I met a respected Historian of the Federalist era (Forest McDonald of Alabama) and asked him for other nation's reaction to the expression of a system of beliefs that I, as many of you, hold quite dear. He told me that after being written in Philadelphia, the Declaration of Independence was soon forgotten here at home, and it was pretty much ignored as a political statement or even as a trite piece of paper in Europe. He told me (although he may have been 1/4 joking) that after 1776, the next significant reference to the D of I was in the South Carolina Ordinance of Secession. I agree that Lincoln resurrected the D of I for his Gettysburg Address, and I think that I agree that he wanted to see some revolutionary fervor and changes as well.
Norman Levitt: The Gettysburg address was certainly a well thought out and meticulously crafted political speech, designed to take advantage of the symbolic value already attached to the battle. Lincoln meant to have the thing widely reprinted and read, and remembered as well--that's one of the reasons for its brevity. His aim, obviously, is to keep alive the flame of patriotism that will see the war through to its conclusion. The symbolism of the address is chosen accordingly.
Let's remember who the address appeals to--the (White) population of the North whose support of the war is conditioned on certain notions of patriotism and a certain sense of what is at stake for them as well as the country. When Lincoln wonders whether a nation like this "can long endure" he's saying something of direct concern to listeners and readers. On the surface, one might say, as the Copperheads did, that it would be just as well to let the slave states go and to continue civic and political life in a republic thus purified. The reason that won't wash for Lincoln and most of the North is the very real fear that the rump Union that would exist post-secession is a state in considerable danger--from a powerful new rival on the continent, as well as from old enemies like the English and French.
The stress on government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" plays on the widespread sense that in the ante-bellum period, the slave South had drifted away from the egalitarianism (among Whites!!) of the foundations of the republic, and into an oligarchy or plutocracy. Many Northerners were convinced that the planter ascendancy had turned the South into a feudal society, where the bulk of the White population (never mind the slaves!!) had been forced into a position of ignorance and dependency on their wealthy overlords. Thus, the secession is seen not as a manifestation of the (Southern) popular will but as the work of a cabal that monopolizes the organs of political discourse and power. Hence, the "new birth of freedom" is not so much a matter of justice for the Blacks, as it is the re-institution of the ideals of '76 among the Southern yeomanry, thereby perpetuating the already existing political freedom of the more democratic North.
Bob Witt: In keeping up with the political spin, can we not look at Lincoln's comments as the words of a lame duck politician? Lets face it, the Union cause was not looking very good at that point. I think an argument can be made that Lincoln probably figured that he was not going to be reelected, that the mood of the country was peace at the price of a divided nation, and that whoever was elected in '64 would try to make peace with the South as soon as possible.
In looking at his words again, it is interesting to note that not once does he say victory. He called it a struggle. Further, he says that the dead did not die in vain. Why would he say those words? They seem so out of place NOW, since we have the benefit of knowing the outcome of the war. But he did not know the outcome. Perhaps one can make the claim that (1) Lincoln was preparing the combatants for the possibility of two nations, one dedicated to the concept of freedom for all and the other continuing the "particular institution" and (2) if he could not win an actual victory, at least he could claim a moral one, a victory consecrated by the actions of those that fell.
SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION
1. Lincoln spoke to reconcile both Northerners and Southerners because both were necessary to save the Union. What kind of "new birth of freedom" would exclude Southerners (or blacks to extend the remarks)?
2. "The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract" refers to both the Union and Confederate soldiers.
3. To Lincoln, the Civil War was an American "struggle". The "struggle" of a child entering the world is evident in Lincoln's imagery of the birth process, of a "nation conceived in liberty," and having "a new birth of freedom." It was not a war of the North against its enemy.
4. Lincoln admitted the North's complicity in slavery and thus placed the blame for the war equally on the North and South.
5. The Civil War was a punishment from God for slavery.
6. Lincoln knowingly uses religious imagery. Some believe it to be sincere, while others see it as a way of manipulating the people's minds, most of whow were largely religious.
7. Politics seems to have been the overriding reason for the gathering at Gettysburg. Linoln saw the invitation as a great opportunity to use the pulpit over the dead to hammer home his ideological belief about America. The local politicians saw it as a chance to gain points in the bitter local political scene, almost dooming the cemetery.
8. The Civil War changed the United States from plural to singular. In the beginning of the war, each state in both North and South saw themselves as deserving most of the power, not the Federal Government.
9. Lincoln's address and most of his other writings, because they did not berate the South, helped to bring us together after the war.
10. Lincoln faced serious challenges in the 1864 election. In light of all this he goes to Gettysburg to give a speech that he knows, due to the already public fascination with the "Battle of Gettysburg", will get wide coverage.
11. In the Address, he submits the proposition that the basic building block of our country is "All men are created equal". As Wills points out Lincoln is embracing the Declaration of Independence - not the Constitution as espousing the idea upon which our country is based on.
12. The reason was not to emphasize the importance of the UNION remaining intact. Were this true, the Constitution's "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union" would have served his purpose much better than the Declaration's "That all men are created equal". Lincoln embraces the Declaration to work the slavery issue into the equation. The Constitution after all not only condones slavery but makes it a constitutional right!
13. Why would Lincoln want to bring up the issue of slavery with the election fast approaching? it would not appear to be in an effort to solidify his base - by 1863 his anti-slavery, abolition credentials are well-established. In fact the issue has the potential to do him more harm than good (witness the NY Draft riots and the negative editorials written after his speech).
13. The reason is not so much domestic policy but foreign policy. The Gettysburg Address, in additions to being a moving eulogy for those who died there, was a not so subtle reminder to Britain that to support the South was to support slavery.
14. If not for the issue of slavery, Britain would have recognized the South as an independent nation. The first Southern commissioner to Britain reported back "the public mind here is entirely opposed to the Government of the Confederate States of America on the question of slavery. The sincerity and universality of this feeling embarrass[es] the government in dealing with the question of our recognition".
15. It was as necessary for Lincoln to frame the war as a struggle for equality of all man as from a political standpoint it was important for the South to frame the war in terms of "states rights".
16. As long as Britain perceived the war as a struggle over slavery the chances of their entering on the side of the South is very small. Obviously the war goes much better for the North if Britain stays out and obviously the better the war goes the better Lincoln's chance of reelection.
17. After the writing of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia, it was soon forgotten here at home, and it was pretty much ignored as a political statement or even as a trite piece of paper in Europe.
18. Lincoln resurrected the Declaration of Independence for his Gettysburg Address. He wanted to see some revolutionary fervor.
19. Lincoln meant to have the Address widely reprinted and read, and remembered as well. That's one of the reasons for its brevity. His aim is to keep alive the flame of patriotism that will see the war through to its conclusion. The symbolism of the address is chosen accordingly.
20. When Lincoln wonders whether a nation like this "can long endure" he's saying something of direct concern to listeners and readers. On the surface, one might say, as the Copperheads did, that it would be just as well to let the slave states go and to continue civic and political life in a republic thus purified. The reason that won't wash for Lincoln and most of the North is the very real fear that the rump Union that would exist post-secession is a state in considerable danger--from a powerful new rival on the continent, as well as from old enemies like the English and French.
21. The stress on government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" plays on the widespread sense that in the ante-bellum period, the slave South had drifted away from the egalitarianism (among Whites) of the foundations of the republic, and into an oligarchy [government by the few] or plutocracy [government by the wealthy].
22. The South had become a feudal society, where the bulk of the White population (never mind the slaves!!) had been forced into a position of ignorance and dependency on their wealthy overlords.
23. The secession of the South did not happen because of the Southern popular will but to monopolize political discourse and power. Hence, the "new birth of freedom" is not so much a matter of justice for the Blacks, as it is the re-institution of the ideals of '76 among the Southern yeomanry, thereby perpetuating the already existing political freedom of the more democratic North.
24. Lincoln's comments were the words of a lame duck politician [one who would not be re-elected and had little power as the time grew close for another person to take his plce].
25. Lincoln believed he was not going to be reelected, that the mood of the country was peace at the price of a divided nation, and that whoever was elected in '64 would try to make peace with the South as soon as possible.
26. He does not use the word "victory". He called it a "struggle". Further, he says that the dead did not die in vain. Perhaps (1) Lincoln was preparing the combatants for the possibility of two nations, one dedicated to the concept of freedom for all and the other continuing the "particular institution" and (2) if he could not win an actual victory, at least he could claim a moral one, a victory consecrated by the actions of those that fell.
