The phrase 鈥淕ive me liberty or give me death!鈥� has survived the centuries like a line in a Shakespeare play.
It鈥檚 been expressed by protesters from the 1989 to those who opposed in 2020.
Malcolm X referenced it in his 1964 鈥淏allot or the Bullet鈥� speech, demanding equal rights for Black Americans. President quoted it on his Truth Social platform last year, lambasting a judge during .
The phrase was reportedly first used 250 years ago Sunday by lawyer and legislator Patrick Henry to persuade Virginia colonists to prepare for war against an increasingly punitive Great Britain, just weeks before the American Revolution.
The liberty, of course, largely was for white, landowning men, not the people Henry and other founders enslaved. He was demanding a specific kind of freedom from the British Empire. Tensions were coming to a boil, particularly in Massachusetts, where the British replaced elected officials, occupied Boston and shuttered the harbor.
鈥淭he entire episode was about helping our brethren in Massachusetts,鈥� said historian John Ragosta, who wrote a book on Henry. 鈥淚t鈥檚 about the community. It鈥檚 about the nation. It鈥檚 not about, 鈥榃hat do I get out of this personally?鈥欌��
The printed version of Henry鈥檚 speech was about 1,200 words. And yet those seven words have lived on, often contorted to fit a political moment.
鈥淚t鈥檚 a very malleable phrase,鈥� said Patrick Henry Jolly, a fifth great-grandson of Henry. 鈥淚t鈥檚 something that can be applied to many different circumstances. But I think it鈥檚 important that people understand the original context.鈥�
Jolly reenacted Henry鈥檚 speech Sunday in the same church where his ancestor delivered it. His presentation and others were part of Virginia's commemoration of the .
Here's more information on Henry and his speech:
Who was Patrick Henry?
Born to an influential Virginia family in 1736, Henry became a successful trial lawyer in his 20s.
According to the Library of Congress, he once astonished a courtroom with an argument that 鈥渕an is born with certain inalienable rights,鈥� an idea .
In 1765, Henry won a seat in Virginia's colonial legislature. He was instrumental in opposing Great Britain's Stamp Act, which levied a direct tax on the American colonies to raise money for Britain.
As tensions increased, many Americans felt like second-class citizens with no representation in parliament, Ragosta said. By the time of Henry's speech, many were thinking: 鈥淭he . They鈥檝e invaded Boston. What should we in Virginia do about that?鈥�
When Henry demanded liberty, he was aware of the contradictions, if not hypocrisy, of the moment.
In to antislavery Quaker John Alsop, Henry acknowledged that slavery was continuing as "the rights of humanity are defined and understood with precision, in a country, above all others, fond of liberty.鈥�
The 鈥渓amentable evil鈥� would someday be abolished, he wrote, but apparently not yet.
鈥淚 am drawn along by the general inconvenience of living without them,鈥� he wrote. 鈥淚 will not 鈥� I cannot justify it, however culpable my conduct.鈥�
Did he really say it?
In his 2004 book, 鈥淔ounding Myths,鈥� historian Ray Raphael wrote 鈥渋t is highly unlikely鈥� Henry said, 鈥淕ive me liberty or give me death!鈥�
Henry did not write down the speech and the version we know today was published 42 years later in an 1817 biography of him. The biographer, attorney William Wirt, pieced together Henry's words from the decades-old recollections of people who were there.
The printed version, Raphael wrote, 鈥渞eflects the agendas of 19th century nationalists who were fond of romanticizing war.鈥�
But other historians said there is ample evidence Henry uttered those words.
鈥淲e have multiple people, years later, saying, 鈥業 remember like it was yesterday,'" Ragosta said, adding that Thomas Jefferson was one of them.
They recalled Henry lifting a letter opener that looked like a dagger and plunging it under his arm as if into his chest before saying the famous phrase.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 18th century oratory," Ragosta said. 鈥滻t鈥檚 very impassioned."
Jon Kukla, another historian who wrote a book on Henry, cited other evidence. Men in Virginia's militias soon embroidered their heavy canvas shirts with 鈥渓iberty or death.鈥�
The popular 1712 play 鈥淐ato鈥� about a Roman senator also contains the line, 鈥淚t is not now a time to talk of aught, but chains or conquest, liberty or death."
鈥淚t would have been part of the literate culture of the age,鈥� Kukla said.
What happened next?
The most immediate impact of Henry's speech was more support for independence and the expansion of Virginia's militias.
In the months afterward, Henry and others also were driven by fears that the British would free enslaved people, Raphael suggests in 鈥淔ounding Myths."
Virginia鈥檚 royal governor, Lord Dunmore, offered freedom to enslaved people who fought for the British.
But Ragosta said that was not a primary motivation for Henry, who enslaved dozens of people.
鈥淭hat does move a lot of people off the fence into the patriot column, undoubtedly,鈥� Ragosta said. 鈥淏ut that鈥檚 not really what鈥檚 going on with the Jeffersons, the Washingtons, the Henrys. They had already been very committed to the patriot movement.鈥�
An estimated 30,000 people escaped Virginia plantations in attempts to reach British lines, according to Simon Schama鈥檚 2005 book, 鈥淩ough Crossings: Britain, the Slaves and the American Revolution.鈥�
One was Ralph Henry, who was enslaved by Patrick Henry and evidently took the famous words 鈥渧ery much to heart,鈥� Schama wrote.
Following independence, Henry served as Virginia's governor five times. He also became known as an anti-federalist, opposing ratification of the U.S. Constitution and a strong central government.
But Henry later spoke in support of the founding document at George Washington's urging in 1799, the year Henry died.
鈥淗e says, 鈥楲ook, I voted against the Constitution, but we the people voted for it. And so we have to abide by it,鈥欌�� Ragosta said.
Liberty versus license
Jolly, Henry's descendant, said most people react positively to his ancestor's famous words and acknowledge their historical significance.
鈥淎nd there are some people that react thinking that it's a rallying cry for them today to defend their rights 鈥� on both sides of the aisle,鈥� Jolly said.
Yet Henry and his contemporaries were careful to distinguish liberty from license, said Kukla, the historian.
鈥淟iberty, as they understood it, was not the freedom to do anything you damn well pleased," Kukla said.
Ben Finley, The Associated Press
