Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 02:53 PM Jul 2014

Have We Been Reading the Declaration of Independence All Wrong?


ABBY OHLHEISER

Here's some fun news for the Fourth of July: America might be reading an important passage of the Declaration of Independence all wrong. A scholar's argument that an authoritative transcription of the Declaration contains a period that isn't actually in the original document has convinced the National Archives to re-examine their presentation of the document. That's according to a well-timed New York Times story on the controversy, which could change how we read the passage beginning "We hold these truths to be self-evident."

First, let's pinpoint what's in question here. The official transcription from the National Archives reads (emphasis ours):

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


See that period? According to Princeton professor Danielle Allen, it's not actually in the original document. If she's right, then the individual rights of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" would share a sentence with what follows:

— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


Allen, speaking to the Times, argues that Thomas Jefferson intended to emphasize the second part of this passage — the role of the government — equally with the individual rights in the first part. Instead, with the period in place, there's an implied hierarchy. So you can begin to see how one little punctuation mark's presence or absence could become the subject of heated debate among those who have strong opinions about the role of government as it concerns individual liberty. Although the punctuation mark is still very much up for debate among experts, Allen has convinced several scholars that she might be on to something. The National Archives told the Times that they "want to take advantage of this possible new discovery" and find a way to re-examine the incredibly fragile original Declaration of Independence.

more
http://www.thewire.com/culture/2014/07/typo-could-mean-weve-been-reading-the-declaration-of-independence-all-wrong/373915/
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Have We Been Reading the Declaration of Independence All Wrong? (Original Post) DonViejo Jul 2014 OP
Interesting. enlightenment Jul 2014 #1
Without doubt you are correct, which means COLGATE4 Jul 2014 #2
Today would be a good day to just burn littlemissmartypants Jul 2014 #3
I can buy that Jefferson was an anti-federaltist who wanted the bill of rights so it's craigmatic Jul 2014 #4
It is interesting but we use the Constitution not the Declaration as the basis of law. former9thward Jul 2014 #5
The Declaration seems to hold a bigger place in American cultural mythology/civil religion though YoungDemCA Jul 2014 #6
K&R YoungDemCA Jul 2014 #7

enlightenment

(8,830 posts)
1. Interesting.
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 03:01 PM
Jul 2014

It is very clearly a semi-colon in the draft version - and since he used a semi-colon later in the same paragraph, it is easy to compare the two marks.

COLGATE4

(14,732 posts)
2. Without doubt you are correct, which means
Thu Jul 3, 2014, 04:51 PM
Jul 2014

that the thought continues with "that to secure these rights...". It's one coherent thought, not two hierarchical paragraphs.

littlemissmartypants

(22,692 posts)
3. Today would be a good day to just burn
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 01:34 AM
Jul 2014

It and start over. Ok, seriously, punctuation matters. Interesting thread? Indeed!

 

craigmatic

(4,510 posts)
4. I can buy that Jefferson was an anti-federaltist who wanted the bill of rights so it's
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 03:03 PM
Jul 2014

not a stretch to believe that he wanted individual rights equal with a role of the government.

former9thward

(32,025 posts)
5. It is interesting but we use the Constitution not the Declaration as the basis of law.
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 03:35 PM
Jul 2014

So it seems somewhat academic.

 

YoungDemCA

(5,714 posts)
6. The Declaration seems to hold a bigger place in American cultural mythology/civil religion though
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 05:09 PM
Jul 2014

So it's not academic in that sense.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Have We Been Reading the ...