Daniel L. Zapler Glenbrook South High School

The Declaration of Independence today is not the same document written in 1776. Curiously, the words are the same, but the significance, importance, reverence, purpose, utility, and even authorship have changed dramatically. Professor Maier's book American Scripture essentially discusses the transmogrification of the Declaration of Independence from a document that was "unoriginal", "hackneyed", "general", "trivial", "insignificant", and for a sole purpose (securing independence) to perhaps the seminal American document. A document that is used for a litany of purposes and seen as revolutionary, groundbreaking, and sacrosanct.

The Declaration of Independence story begins after the "Blood and Tumult at Lexington and Concord." The Colonists were plunged into a regrettable war with their respected and loved home country of England. The business of congress in these early days of war was not even faintly about the independent future of the American Colonists. The business of the day was centered on fighting a war and finding ways to bring the British to there senses in respect to the colonists' grievances. Only as an afterthought did congress find time to discuss issues, "like the colonies' future, or consider documents of significance, such as the Declaration of Independence." At this time, to declare independence would have been absurd. The colonists were still very much English and wanted to remain English.

When independence was discussed in 1775 the outspoken John Adams new the colonies were "not yet ripe." Adams understood that if independence was to become a reality the American colonies had to be united in their pursuit. To unify the colonies would take time. "Like a coach and six, the swiftest horses must be slackened, and the slowest quickened, that all may keep an even pace." To move a disorganized and diverse assembly of colonies, in the midst of war, toward "ripeness" would take skill, restraint, and equally importantly luck, which came in the from of decisions made by George III.

George III took the actions and petitions by the colonists as acts of "open and avowed rebellion." As a reaction to the colonists, King George III took increased steps to "put the colonists in their place" and this place was under the control and submission to Britain and himself. King George III offered freedom to slaves in Virginia if they fought against their masters. This action predictable moved Virginia towards "ripeness." George III also sent foreign soldiers to help fight the colonists and passed the Prohibitory Act. These and other "acts of wanton barbarity and cruelty perpetrated by the British Forces [have] prepared men's minds for an Independency, that were shocked at the idea a few weeks ago." It began to appear as though congress could wait and the nation would ripen to independence without their help, but rather have George III's acts and proclamations do all the work for them. The irony of George III's actions is lucid; a man attempting to stem the tide of separation and independence repeatedly pushes the colonies closer to that which he is trying to avoid. This irony is fascinating because it illustrates how history is often the plaything of mistakes, miscues, accidents, arrogance, ignorance, and ultimately fate.

One such instance of apparent fate was the writing of Common Sense. Common Sense, although criticized by the haughty members of congress did something congress was not able to do. This passionate work touched upon the zeitgeist and brought the peoples' support to the idea of independence, an idea congress was already moving towards, but could not fully embrace without the support of the people. To gain the support of the people, Common Sense had to "shift the focus of public debate from evaluations of British rulers and the prospects for reconciliation to deciding how an independent America should be governed." In this respect, Common Sense was a tremendous success.

With the people and Congress in a rare state of unanimity pertaining to independence the act of drafting the document for independence had to be done. The committee was comprised of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Ben Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert Livingston, but Jefferson was the one to write the first draft. Jefferson pulled upon all the sources available to him at the time. He used English Law, philosophers such as John Locke, and the numerous declarations of independence bubbling up from the states and cities. In this respect, the Declaration of Independence was in no way original for the time, but rather attempted to capture and incorporate the sentiments of all the colonies. Jefferson admitted to James Madison in 1823 that he "did not consider it part of my charge to. invent new ideas altogether, and to offer no sentiment which had ever been expressed before." It should also be noted that the lack of originality in the Declaration of Independence was not much of a concern in the time. In fact, originality was not valued in eighteenth century America, but rather the ability to weave old ideas into one's purposes was valuable and Jefferson was quite masterful at this.

With the draft complete Jefferson had to undergo the torture of having his work edited by not only the drafting committee, but also the entire congress. The document was poured over by Congress and entire sections were dropped, but perhaps more significantly Congress paid attention to minor nuances as well. "This was no hack editing job: the delegates who labored over the draft Declaration had a splendid ear for language." Jefferson had the painful fortune of having tremendous editors who had "intelligence, political good sense, and a discerning sense if language." The editors, perhaps as much as Jefferson, deserve credit for the Declaration of Independence.

Now written, edited, and mostly read aloud throughout the land, the Declaration of Independence in 1776 was not a sacred work in the least. For the people of the time the grievances against the King were general and vague and the philosophical elements were redundant and hackneyed. As one noted, "Independence was new; the rest of the Declaration seemed all too familiar, a restatement of what had already been said time and again." Not only did the people of 1776 think the Declaration was redundant, but not even an "unusually eloquent or powerful" statement of that which had already been asserted in the colonies. When the various states began to declare independence themselves, they did not simply refer to the Continental Congress's Declaration, but instead altered the document. This fact shows that in 1776 and 1777 the Declaration was not seen as "so compelling . . . and so eloquent that no improvements were possible." After independence was declared, many official papers and declarations were made and "in none of these documents is there any evidence whatsoever that the Declaration of Independence lived in men's minds as a classic statement of American political
principles." The life of the Declaration of Independence was almost dead on arrival and if not dead nearly forgotten.

How did the Declaration of Independence become vaulted to the highest levels of American pride, utility, and philosophy? The answer to this question is consistent with the Declaration's life thus far; the Declaration's rise to sacrosanct was essentially the byproduct of politics, foggy memories, reverence for the fathers of the Revolution, and all oppressed peoples desire to be free from oppression.

The 1790s found the young nation in the midst of bitter partisan politics between the Federalists and the Republicans. The Federalists' attempt to discredit the Republicans and build relationships with the British led to the Federalists attack on Jefferson and in turn the Declaration of Independence itself. Republican counter attacks and defenses led the party to start vaulting Jefferson and "his" Declaration to new heights. The Federalist Party eventually faded away and the Jeffersonian Republicans took the day. With Republican longevity, came their view of Jefferson and in turn, the Declaration of Independence.

In 1826 (the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration), Americans found an interest in their own history and with this newfound interest, "members of the revolutionary generation were heroified and the Declaration began to assume a certain holy quality." Perhaps every generation looks back on an older generation and sees them as better than his own. Today, the men and women who fought in WWII are seen with an almost heroic quality. We have these men and women as speakers, we write books about these people, and call them "The Greatest Generation". The people of the mid-1800s saw the revolutionaries in this light. So naturally the documents the revolutionaries wrote would be seen in a greater than human light as well.

As the principle writers and editors of the Declaration began to die or become elderly the survivors memories began to fade. With the faded memories of Jefferson and Adams the Declaration was exaggerated to new heights. It seems as though Jefferson forgot how much help he received from his committee and editors and Adams forgot how "forgettable" the document was in the 1770s. At the time of these two men's deaths (coincidently on July 4th the Declaration was already seen as sacred and one cannot blame these men for not minimizing their lives achievements. I also believe that because
of the sacred beliefs about the Declaration at the time of their deaths, Jefferson and Adams too believed that the Declaration was truly special.

The last step the Declaration took towards becoming an "American Scripture" was when oppressed people used the document to fulfill their desires for equality. The document now became a rally cry for women, blacks, immigrants, farm workers, teachers, factory workers etc. The Declaration was seen as a promise for all Americans. A promise that guaranteed "Life, Liberty, and Happiness." If any group found themselves denied these "Inalienable Rights" in the United States, the Declaration would be used as a weapon to gain these rights. The Declaration would be used to shame the United States into fulfilling the promise it made on July 4, 1776. Even though the signers never intended the Declaration to be a promise of "equality and freedom" for all Americans; the Declaration with an apparent life and fate of its own willed Americans to believe that we all deserve certain inalienable and God given rights or perhaps it was Americans themselves who willed the Declaration to fulfill the dreams of a nation. In spite of the historical realities, the Declaration of Independence is a document that articulates the hopes and dreams of people today. The Declaration describes what Americans, at their best, want for their world, nation, community, family, and self; this is why the Declaration of Independence is "American Scripture".

Return to Reactions to Assigned Readings index