Rhetorical Devices in Speech to the Second Virginia Convention

The rhetorical technique Henry uses here is hypophora, commonly called a rhetorical question, in which a speaker poses a sequence of questions followed by an immediate response. One effect of this technique is to stir an audience to action. Since Henry speaks with such passion, these rhetorical questions drive him to greater and greater heights of agitation before he finally erupts with his infamous exclamation. The force of such emotion is contagious and serves as a pathos appeal to his audience.

With the use of parallel structure, Henry reiterates each of his points and highlights how the British have wronged the Americans. This list also employs asyndeton and anaphora in the repetition of “our” at the beginning of each phrase. The vitriolic barrage of insults serves to further compound his point and rile up his audience in his favor.

Here, Henry appeals to his audience’s emotions by laying out all the ways that Americans have tried to ameliorate their relationship with the British: they have petitioned, remonstrated, supplicated, and prostrated. Using asyndeton and anaphora, whereby Henry speaks without conjunctions between the clauses and with the repetition of the phrase “we have,” he expounds his points with storm-like rage. This repetitive technique creates an emphatic, rhythmic quality that powerfully condemns the British.

Both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible make reference to eyes that cannot see and ears that cannot hear to describe God’s followers who do not attend to his teachings. Henry alludes to these passages (Isaiah 6:10, Jeremiah 5:21, Ezekiel 12:2, Matthew 13:15, Acts 28:27, and Romans 11:8) to compare his audience to such ignorant disciples. With this rhetorical question, Henry encourages his audience to remain vigilant.

Throughout the speech, Henry equates the loss of liberty with slavery. By doing so, he sets up a choice between peaceful subjugation and violent revolution, with no middle ground. If the colonists are willing to live in chains, then they can avoid a war. However, in one of the most famous lines of rhetoric in American history, Henry provides his answer to that choice: a life without freedom is not worth living. He shifts “the question before the house” away from whether or not to engage in armed conflict with Britain and instead posits a much simpler choice: liberty or slavery, life or death. By establishing “liberty” and “death” as the only outcomes, Henry asserts that the colonies must fight since a life without liberty is not an option.

This is Henry’s call to action to the assembly and his answer to the “question before the house.” Up until this point, Henry has been outlining the injustices that the British have inflicted upon the colonists. He has painted the colonists as long-suffering peace-seekers who have been repeatedly disrespected and rebuffed. In his call to arms, he employs the first-person plural pronoun “we” to indicate unity and the word “must” to indicate that fighting is no longer an option but rather a necessity. Henry has explained all of the ways that American liberty has been infringed upon. Now he appeals directly to the sense of patriotism of his listeners by stating that they must take up arms and defend their rights.

Henry uses a rhetorical question to highlight the aggression of the British government and the improbability of a peaceful end to the mounting tensions. The colonies had, up until this point, emphasized peaceful reconciliation and desired to remain a part of the British empire if the Intolerable Acts were addressed satisfactorily. The response by the British was to either outright ignore their appeals or, as seen in the case of the House of Burgesses, remove even more rights. They also increased their naval presence after the Boston Tea Party, leading to increased friction. By sarcastically questioning the peacefulness of Britain’s intentions behind their military escalations, Henry indicates that hostilities are imminent and that the time for peace is over.

Patrick Henry (1736–1799) had a reputation as a passionate and skilled orator who could translate lofty political discussions into common language. Henry’s speeches were famous for their impromptu nature and animated delivery. His candid speaking style and tendency to shape his rhetoric for the common man helped spread revolutionary ideals to the masses. By promising to speak “freely” and “without reserve,” Henry appeals to ethos by establishing himself as an honest, straightforward voice. He also establishes a sense of urgency by rejecting ceremoniousness in favor of plain, direct speaking.