Treaty of Ghent: Rhetoric

    Treaty of Ghent: Rhetoric

      Ethos

      The Treaty of Ghent isn't exactly a rousing locker-room speech. Who's going to start a slow-clap over a war that had no winners? When you read this document you're essentially reading a legal agreement—sort of like the page you have to click "accept" on before downloading something.

      The rhetoric of the treaty appeals largely to the authority of the people involved. The preamble section names each of the American and British ambassadors, or "Plenipotentiaries," stating that they are acting as legal representatives on behalf of their respective countries.

      (In our opinion, the Brits have the way classier titles)

      The most recurring word in the text is "shall," which makes sense since the document has the imperative weight of an official law. Keep in mind, this was a document intended for the governments of the two parties—it's not meant to rouse people to action, but to command them what to do.

      Notably, the last article of the treaty declares that it has to be ratified "without alteration" (XI.1). It had to be ratified in full, or not at all. This was a way of getting to peace more quickly, and assuring that the signatories would have final authority—rather than leaving things to be debated by Congress and Parliament.

      You know how that can go.