English Professor Michael Ditmore Publishes Book on the Declaration of Independence’s Rhetorical Methods and Composition History

With the approach of the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, scholars have been inspired to reflect on the summer of 1776 when drafting one of the most impactful documents in modern history was underway. 

Among those scholars is Seaver College professor of English Michael Ditmore, who has authored the new book, Texting the Nation: Agencies and Actions in the Declaration of Independence. Published in the Routledge Research in American Literature and Culture series, his book closely parses the Declaration of Independence’s logical argument and composition history from a rhetorical standpoint.

“The Founders used a verbal formula to enact political separation from England,” says Ditmore. “The Declaration did not just describe a given reality, but changed it. In linguistic theory this is called a speech act—usually, it has to be done in just the right context and with just the right language, but this was also a revolutionary situation in which Congress was self-authorizing the act. So, in order to do this kind of rhetorical analysis, I had to back up and make sure I more thoroughly knew what the text actually is.” 

On Close Examination

Ditmore’s research process included the close reading of five official versions of the Declaration. These vary subtly, he notes, in punctuation, capitalization, and signatures—though he most closely referenced a broadside print by Mary Katherine Goddard from 1777. This print was the first to publicize the names of all who signed the Declaration. Additionally, Ditmore studied various drafts authored by Thomas Jefferson throughout June of 1776. 

Within the document’s major premise, which emphasizes people’s inherent rights and a people’s right to revolt if said rights are violated, he observed a distinct passive voice structure. Such statements include “All men are created equal,” which does not explicitly identify the creating force, and “Governments are instituted among Men” which notably leaves the instituting agent ambiguous. 

“The question for me was,” he shares, “is the same kind of conception of God at play in both parts of this document?” 

Ditmore’s analysis indicated a change. “By the final version if you go down the list of grievances section—while they all may appear to sound just the same—the agent changes from God to people. I think we would all say in America, human beings institute governments. But if we said God did that, that might change how we look at the document itself.”

By the 1820s, Ditmore notes, critical readers had begun to draw attention to this distinction. Sometimes accused of being an infidel, Jefferson’s authorship explains the “divine passivity” within this text, just as the remaining Founders added more direct attributes to God in the closing. Yet, through this verbal formula, the Declaration of Independence was written to represent both a deistic and a Christian populace. 

But Ditmore’s close examination of material revealed an even more salient change in the Declaration’s minor premise: Congress’s removal of a 168-word passage that decried King George III’s initiation and perpetuation of slavery in America. “This deletion apparently miffed Jefferson,” Ditmore says, “but most readers believe that Congress did the right thing. The wording of the slavery clause is so confusing that readers usually have difficulty in paraphrasing it.”

Textual Echoes

Throughout Texting the Nation, Ditmore also included evidence of textual echoes from the Virginia Declaration of Rights, Jefferson’s draft for the Virginia Constitution, and the Lee Resolution, all published that summer of 1776. Additionally, Ditmore referenced the researched commentary of Founder contemporary Timothy Pickering and the analyses of Jacques Derrida, a leader of literary deconstructionism writing at the time of the bicentennial.

“The reason we know about these changes today is because of Jefferson’s willful, unsolicited decision to preserve his own Declaration draft and derisive comments on how it was edited,” Ditmore wrote in his book. “This was rather uncommon, especially considering that he further circulated the drafts alone among an inner circle of confidantes that he must have assumed would sooner or later become public.” 

Ditmore explains that the impetus to write Texting the Nation began 35 years ago. While teaching at the University of Texas at Austin, where he also received his MA and PhD in English, he became intrigued at the circulation of Jefferson’s drafts, bringing his students into the inquiry during class lectures and discussions.

Leading shared inquiry, a pedagogical practice Ditmore continues while teaching Great Books and English at Seaver, allowed both him and his students to reach a fuller understanding of the Declaration’s style and meaning—and its various interpretations.

“The curiosity of my students was a great source of encouragement during the years I researched and drafted Texting the Nation,” says Ditmore. “It’s been really helpful for me to have an audience willing to engage with ideas, words, texts—and an extraordinarily impactful document. The Declaration of Independence holds the virtue of inputting something of American character into a document compact and accessible to all.”