Perhaps one of the most amazing things about Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, beside the fact that its brevity belies its significance and power, relates to what was omitted within the content of the speech, “It is brief, one might argue, because it is silent on so much that one would expect to hear about. The Gettysburg Address does not mention Gettysburg. Nor slavery. Nor—more surprising—the Union. (Certainly not the South)” (Wills). But Wills omits the fact that much of the first part of the speech Lincoln acknowledges the sacrifices that were made at the Battle of Gettysburg only a few short weeks before his speech was made, and he also fails to report that one of the key aspects of the speech was in discussing the issues framed in the speech in terms of the nation either standing or falling as a whole, when towards its end Lincoln affirms that the soldiers who died in battle would not have done so in vain, “that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom” (Wills). As such, The Gettysburg Address seems more of an earnest attempt to move the country together in the face of such a divisive civil war.

The preamble to the speech acknowledges the intent of the country’s founders, which he stated was to acknowledge that all men are created equal (Wills). While we may understand this only as an ideal that was never put into practice, Rachel Shafer understands the opening in terms of Lincoln intending to remind those in attendance “of America’s origins because he saw a clear link between America’s founding and the historic events of the day” (27). Lincoln sees the parallel with the civil war and the fact that so many people have given their lives for the sake of keeping the nation whole, “We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live” (Wills). This passage may be viewed as a justification for the sacrifices made in the name of the nation (or Union if preferred). But perhaps like others who have studied the speech, Chuck Leddy understands that Lincoln’s acknowledgment of the lives lost on the field of battle at Gettysburg is his way of allowing for redemption; acknowledging the sacrifices allows “the nation to live” (Leddy 8).

To Lincoln, it is “fitting and proper” (Mills) to acknowledge the lives lost as a result of the battle that had occurred at Gettysburg, but even more Lincoln understands that standing in the aftermath of the battle and speaking in hallowed terms come nowhere near what occurred during the fighting “The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract” (Wills). In a sense, in his brief speech, and during such a solemn occasion, Lincoln is more or less rationalizing the loss of life. The fact that the efforts of soldiers who fought at Gettysburg is proof of the fact that “they gave the last measure of their devotion” (Wills), something that the living must honor as a task worthy to continuation “that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause” (Wills). It is, as Lincoln would say, “a great task,” (Wills) and perhaps meant to buttress the resolve of the American public is the face of such tragic losses, described by Gabor Boritt in relatively stark terms “But here was Gettysburg, the bloodiest of American battles, in the bloodiest war of her history. A ‘great task’ remained before the country: carrying the war to victory” (para. 14).

The president seemed to take little stock in his speech, or at least that is what he conveyed by stating “The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here,” (Wills) instead preferring to remain on the topic of the sacrifices made in battle “but it can never forget what they did here” (Wills). While Lincoln’s sentiment is short sighted on this account, it still remains a noble gesture to which Shafer remarks with a great degree of admiration “It is ironic, in retrospect, that such famous words should put such little faith in speeches’ power, and urge us instead to remember the courageous actions” (27).

At its conclusion Lincoln reiterates his intention to honor the fallen, as well as those who fought and survived, by stating their efforts were not for nothing, “that we here highly resolve these dead shall not have died in vain” (Wills). Leddy alludes to this passage as being Lincoln’s reassurance to the country that the war is worth fighting, “Lincoln explained the core principles of the war-ravaged nation and succinctly answered the question every wartime president must answer: Why is this war worth the lives of our youth?” (8). It is Lincoln’s just cause, “that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom” (Wills). Lincoln intends to bring the nation together as a whole with the intention of remedying the fact that liberty and equality, as written in the Declaration of Independence, were not merely words; they were meant for all living in America.

As Wills notes by citing the transcendentalist Theodore Parker, Lincoln appears to have been greatly influenced by his beliefs, especially as the pertained to the Declaration of Independence, “Parker’s great love of ‘the fathers’ was concentrated on what he considered their finest legacy, the Declaration of Independence. That was ‘the American idea’ by which later history had to be judged” (Wills). Parker appears to have believed the very nature of American politics was transcendent, perhaps the experiment in democracy that was all the rave during and since. Parker seems to affirm this notion through acknowledgement that the American Revolution “is an attempt to prove by experience this transcendental proposition, to organize the transcendental idea of politics” (Wills). Lincoln reaffirms the notion of Parker at the end of the Gettysburg Address as if he were channeling Parker’s beliefs “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” (Wills). In the face of a war that has fractured the country it remains that America is also in the midst of a political experiment intent upon transforming current notions of politics and reorganize politics to a much higher order.