21 pages • 42 minutes read
Thomas JeffersonA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
The middle section of the Declaration of Independence is a list of 27 complaints against the king and government of Great Britain, what the text calls both “a long train of abuses and usurpations” as well as a “history of repeated injury and usurpations.” These grievances include everything from the imposition of taxes to “works of death, desolation, and tyranny.” Each complaint is unique, and some seem relatively trivial, but they add up to what the signers believe to be a compelling case. The list seeks to prove that the king has not done his duties as the leader of a government. Further, by offering such a litany of complaints, the authors hoped to sway other Americans to support their cause. One might not agree completely with the authors’ philosophy, but perhaps the concrete failures of the British government could sway a reader to support independence.
The list also serves as a symbol of something significant to the signers of the Declaration of Independence. It shows that the colonists are not acting hastily or responding to “light and transient causes” and that they are decent and respectful people honoring their duty to “declare the causes which impel them” to separate from Britain. The list of causes forcing them to dissolve their ties to the British reinforces the morality of their actions. It helps prove that they are acting on principle, unlike the king who continues to abuse his power. Their thorough criticism of the existing government suggests that the new government to be formed will avoid these shortcomings. It will succeed where the British government has failed in protecting the “unalienable rights” of Americans.
The Declaration of Independence makes several references to God and nature, although it never explicitly references the Judeo-Christian God. It makes references to a “Creator,” to “Nature’s God,” and to “the Supreme Judge of the world.” While scholars and politicians have long debated how religious the text is (and, by extension, how religious the founding of the United States was) and noted the deist beliefs of Jefferson and other Founding Fathers, religion and God at least serve a symbolic function in the text. The signers use God and nature to appeal to something higher than human law even while making a very legalistic argument. While the king is legally their ruler, they argue that legitimate authority derives not from mere heredity or tradition but instead from the “Creator” who endows people with “unalienable rights.” God and nature thus serve as the foundation for the larger argument. The signers introduce God and nature as ultimate principles that supersede custom and tradition. They may be breaking the king’s law, but they are justified in doing so by a higher law.
While the signers at times soften their language to reflect the gravity of their decision and to emphasize that they are not rebelling for “light and transient causes,” they use decidedly forceful language to argue that what they say is not conjecture or opinion but fact. The opening lines of the second paragraph, perhaps the most famous lines in the entire text, do not merely state that the signers believe people have rights; rather, they “hold these truths to be self-evident.” They similarly claim that the list of 27 grievances against the king is a submission of “Facts […] to a candid world.”
The use of “truths” and “facts” not only makes the colonists’ argument more forceful but also makes it more persuasive. While the purpose of the document was to explain an action and win support, the language of the Declaration does not suggest a matter that is up for debate. The list of incontrovertible facts makes the argument seem more logical, while also making the actions of the signers seem inevitable. Given these grievances, the document seems to say, we cannot do anything else but sever ties with Great Britain. Of course, these “truths” and “facts” are mostly one-sided interpretations of complex events, but the presentation of these interpretations as simple facts plays a role in making a more convincing argument.