In first-century England, Anglo-Saxon poetry consisted of oral verse accompanied by music, often touching on subjects such as hardships and bravery, wisdom gained through suffering, ancestral honor, and cultural legends. The Anglo-Saxon poet, or ‘scop,’ would often weave myth and folklore into true historical accounts, providing the people with a means of learning the historical events of their past as well as the pagan traditions that defined their beliefs and virtues.[1] As the poetry was only oral, the scops used early literary devices to aid in the extensive memorization of their lines. Alliteration and caesura, a metrical pause, were the distinctive aspects of this early poetry that made it easier to memorize and sing. Because it was sung, a musical meter, evident in writing as trochaic tetrameter, was also a definitive aspect of the ancient poetry. Once memorized, the scop could add words or extra emphatic lines to the structure to make it his own creation; compound words and kennings were very popular poetic tools.[2] When Anglo-Saxon poetry was finally written down between the seventh and ninth centuries, these devices remained in the structure, and this poetic genre became characterized by the alliteration, caesura, compound words, and trochaic tetrameter that it had orally embodied before.[3] Of course, the lexicon at this time was primarily germanic—apart from minor Latin influences from the Roman conquest in 60BC and again in 46AD—and it wasn’t until the Normans invaded England in 1066, making Anglo-Norman French the aristocratic language, that latinate vocabulary began to impressionably infiltrate English speech.[4] With this influence, the old dialects around London evolved into the more recognizable Middle English which lasted from “1100–1150 until about 1450–1500,” during which the song-poem tradition, as some scholars have claimed, continued through new mediums of balladry and dramatic arts (“Middle English, n”).[5] Due to the Great Vowel Shift, which gradually occurred between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the language ultimately formed into the Early Modern English of Shakespeare’s time—the language which I will be evaluating in this essay.[6]
The above was a brief history of a very intricate and complex linguistic evolution, the purpose of which was to provide a picture, however so small, of the ancient linguistic roots that shaped the English language, and particularly its poetry. While the poetry of Shakespeare’s famous predecessor, Geoffrey Chaucer, contains meter closely resembling iambic pentameter, scholars believe that it was during the sixteenth century that this metric structure was solidified as the English poetic standard, which would make Shakespeare a forerunner in its establishment.[7] Shakespeare’s poetry was heavily influenced not only by Chaucer and the subsequent English-language writers, but also by his classical education in Latin and its derivatives, ultimately from which the early modern concept of poetic meter and many rhetorical devices are derived.[8] Thus, through a conglomerate education of classics and forerunning English poets, Shakespeare’s poetic language became formulated, and thus recognizable, through lines of iambic pentameter, intricately woven with innumerous rhetorical devices, paired vocabulary of germanic and latinate origin, as well as many sounds, phrases, and words which he himself invented.[9]
While this is Shakespeare’s common medium of poetic expression, there are moments in his works where the structure breaks from its standard form, drawing the reader’s attention to a new sentiment through the divergent structure. The intentionality that the Poet demonstrates in the placement, structure, and form of his creations, indicates purpose behind every literary divergence or convergence he includes. Shakespearean scholar, David Crystal, in an essay on Shakespeare’s language explains that “in an artistic construct, each linguistic decision counts, for it effects the structure and interpretation of the whole” (Crystal liv). In Shakespeare’s Macbeth, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and The Tempest, several instances of metrical divergence occur, in which Shakespeare includes precise aspects of Anglo-Saxon poetic devices, particularly evident through the interruptive presence of trochaic and iambic tetrameter. In most of these metrically-divergent cases, strong clusters of alliteration, compound words, and germanic-based lexicon also appear in the same lines. When inspecting the characters through whom these ancient-resembling devices resound, it is remarkable that each one is a character of mythic origin. In these three plays, those who speak with this ancient voice are the witches, fairies, and spirits, characters whose origins are deeply rooted in Anglo-Saxon folkloric tradition.[10]
This overt presence of alliteration, compound words, germanic diction, and especially trochaic tetrameter in the speeches of Shakespeare’s folkloric characters reveals such a close relation to the structures of Old English poetry that it is probable the Playwright inserted these structures intentionally to distinguish the mythic voices from those of ‘reality,’ and to evoke an ancient, mystical sensation in the audience’s minds. This observation not only indicates Shakespeare’s ostensible knowledge of Old English poetic structure, but also a general understanding of its sound and origin by the masses of Elizabethan society. The following paragraphs highlight traces of this ancestral language in Shakespeare’s folkloric creations of witches in Macbeth, fairies in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and spirits in The Tempest, revealing the contemporary influence of Old English on both the language and the culture of Elizabethan England.
I. Macbeth: Witches and the Mythic Voice of ‘Wyrde’
Shakespeare opens the tragic tale of Macbeth with the presence of supernatural and mythical beings; three witches to whom he refers as “The weird sisters” (I.iii.29). This Early Modern English term ‘weird’ derives from the Anglo-Saxon word ‘wyrde,’ which means ‘fate.’[11] The word, so ancient in its ties, links even further back to the Indo-European language through the root ‘wer-’ most frequently signifying the action “to turn, bend,” through which the Online Etymology Dictionary suggests “For sense development from “turning” to “becoming,” compare phrase turn into “become,”” yoking together the concepts of ‘turning,’ ‘bending,’ and ‘becoming,’ all of which tie into the semantic definition of ‘fate.’ (“weird, adj.”). The manner in which the term maintained its fate-centered essence over an extensive evolution demonstrates the timeless significance of this mythical conception of providential influence. Thus the term grew, in Anglo-Saxon mythology, to refer to the “Wyrdes” or “fates” who were supernatural creatures, represented by “usually three sisters, who weave the destiny of man” (Shamas 10).
In Raphael Holinshed’s 1577 Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland—the text from which Shakespeare is assumed to have derived many of his plots, including Macbeth—these mythical Fates are described, “(as ye would say) goddesses of destinie, or else some nymphs or feiries indued with knowledge of prophecie” (Holinshed 269)[12]. As Shakespeare’s tale originates from the allegedly true “strange and vncouth woonder” of Holinshed’s account of “Makbeth,” it is undeniably clear that Shakespeare, along with his contemporaries, would have been very familiar with this ancient myth of the Fates. This is particularly evident through the parenthetical note that Holishead includes in his description of the Fates to his Early Modern English readers, “(as ye would say),” indicating their knowledge of the mythical creatures as a general, widespread understanding. Holinshed explicitly depicts the Fates as “three women in strange and wild apparell, resembling creatures of elder world” (263). The phrase “elder world” indicates a mystic, archaic, and ancient appearance of the women, further revealing their ties to Anglo-Saxon, Old-English folklore.
Thus, it is not surprising to observe that the language of these witches throughout the play vastly differs from that of the other characters. While Shakespeare generally composes his lines in iambic pentameter, the three sisters consistently, and most frequently speak in trochaic tetrameter, shifting between trochaic and iambic stress patterns depending on the character. It is the character, Hectate, the “Queen of the Witches,” who diverges by speaking in iambic tetrameter (which I will cover more in depth in subsequent paragraphs). The three witches, however, when performing and conversing on subjects of mystical and magical matter—which occurs throughout the majority of their presence by incantations, prophesies, and schemes—most always speak in trochaic tetrameter (apart from sparse instances in which they speak in prose, blank verse, and other variations).[13] From the first Act, this distinction is present in the First Witch’s words,
“I will drain him dry as hay:
(I.iii.17-23)
Sleep shall neither night nor day
Hang upon his pent-house lid;
He shall live a man forbid:
Weary se’nnights nine times nine
Shall he dwindle, peak and pine:
Though his bark cannot be lost,
Yet it shall be tempest-tost.”
Through the echoed voice of trochaic tetrameter, Shakespeare achieves an archaic and Anglo-Saxon sensation, linguistically representing the folkloric nature of the characters. As recorded in Holinshed’s Chronicles, the historical account of Macbeth occurred between 1034 and 1040AD, a period in time prior to the Norman invasion of 1066, and thus still considerably part the Anglo-Saxon period.[14] As the historical veracity of play lies within the period of thriving Anglo-Saxon culture (both of myth and poetry), Shakespeare seems to more accurately capture this understanding by combining the mythic element with the ancient poetic sound of its origin and time. This presence of archaic meter similarly appears in an earlier account of Macbeth from the hand of a Scottish writer, linking the mythic roots across the primeval as well as medieval British Isles. Supposedly written and published for the first time in 1420AD, The Original Chronicle of Andrew of Wyntoun, recounts the same mystical encounter between Macbeth and the Weird Sisters from a Middle English voice:[15]
“He saw thre women by gangand,
(Vol. IV, lines 1900-1912)
And þai thre women þan thocht he
Thre werd sisteris like to be […]
The thrid said: “fonder I se þe king.”
Than thocht he nixt for to be king,
Fra Duncanis dais had tane ending”
This excerpt contains, although irregular, a meter more closely resembling the Anglo-Saxon sound of trochaic tetrameter than that of Shakespeare’s Early Modern iambic pentameter, which became popular in the Elizabethan era.[16] It is also replete with alliteration and consonant-clustering, the other prominent Old-English poetic devices. The presence of the rhyme scheme comes from French influence, introduced to the English language after the Norman invasion of 1066.[17] The rhyming pattern is one that Shakespeare also follows, highlighting an intriguing tie between the two era’s, and yoking Germanic and Latinate literary devices in a similar manner that he often yokes their respective vocabulary. This evidence of of literary morphology would have been available to Shakespeare, who was familiar with the works of Geoffrey Chaucer, a relative contemporary of Andrew of Wyntoun.[18] This comprehensive ability would not have been unique to Shakespeare, but it is very likely that the educated classes of Elizabethan society were familiar with this Middle English poetry and the recollection of its archaic phonology. The lower classes as well, would likely have been able to recognize an antiquated sound by way of cultural outlets and sources of balladry, oral presentations of poetry, and of course, the ever-popular plays.[19]
Going back to Shakespeare’s text, it is clear that the Poet inserts many of these typically Old-English devices in the construction of his witch-speech lines. In the aforementioned passage of Act I, Scene III, there is a frequent presence of alliteration: “Sleep shall,” “neither night nor,” “sen’nights nine times nine,” and “peak and pine;” as well as two compound words, “pent-house” and “tempest-tost,” adding to the noun-heavy, consonant-clustered sentiment of the scene. In examining the well-known moment around the cauldron in the very first scene of Act IV, the witches again maintain their speech entirely within trochaic tetrameter, and demonstrate several other aspects of Anglo-Saxon poetry:
[ALL]
“Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn, and cauldron bubble”[Second Witch]
(IV.i.10-19)
Fillet of a fenny snake,
In the cauldron boil and bake; […]
Adder’s fork and blind-worm’s sting,
Lizard’s leg and owlet’s wing,
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.”
In these lines, we see alliteration in the words “Double, double,” “boil and bake,” and “boil and bubble.” There is even an instance of a phonetic alliteration between “charm” and “trouble,” which both possess a similar initial phonetic sound resembling [č]. Similarly, there are the compound-words, “blind-worm” and hell-broth.” Throughout the course of this 38-line moment, before Hectate arrives, the sisters produce six compound words, and 20 overt instances of alliteration, vastly outnumbering those of the mortal characters’ speeches by proportion. It is also important to recognize the overpowering amount of Germanic lexicon in their speech, which equally reflects the ancient origin of the mythic element they embody. The Third Witch’s lines intensely reflect this Germanic presence:
“Scale of dragon, tooth of wolf,
(IV.i.22-34)
Witches’ mummy, maw and gulf
Of the ravin’d salt-sea shark,
Root of hemlock digg’d i’ the dark, […]
Finger of birth-strangled babe
Ditch-deliver’d by a drab,
Make the gruel thick and slab:”
These Anglo-Saxon poetic patterns continue until the arrival of Hectate, the voice of whom introduces a more elevated manner of speech through the diminishment of consonants and alliteration, the absence of compound words, the presence of more Latinate vocabulary, and a shift into an iambic stress pattern, while still maintaining the archaic tetrameter:
“O well done! I commend your pains;
(IV.i.39-43)
And every one shall share i’ the gains;
And now about the cauldron sing,
Live elves and fairies in a ring,
Enchanting all that you put in.”
It appears that Shakespeare creates this distinction as a method of observing a hierarchy between the three witches and their Queen. In classic mythology, Hectate possesses a dual-goddess position of both darkness and light. As Hectate, she represents magic, witchcraft, and the underworld, the dark side of her being; as Diana, she represents woodland animals, and is often associated with the English myths of fairyland.[20] As she embodies a more distanced role in Anglo-Saxon mythology, her distinguished language in Macbeth reflects not only her authoritative position, but also her mythological disconnectedness from the Three Sisters’ immediate tie within English folklore.
II. A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Fairies and the Mythic “Hobgoblin”
In A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Titania is believed to be a reflection of the counterpart of Hectate, Diana, as she assumes the role of “Fairy Queen,” ultimately the queen of woodland creatures (I.ii.8).[21] Thus, Shakespeare in a similar manner infuses A Midsummer Night’s Dream with both classic and Anglo-Saxon mythology. As the Poet often yokes Latinate and Germanic vocabulary together, he does the same with their respective myths; and through the juxtaposition, he accentuates the aspects of the Anglo-Saxon poetic tradition, allowing it to stand out against the standard, and elevated linguistic elements of classic, Latinate speech. The moments in A Midsummer Night’s Dream that particularly evoke Anglo-Saxon mythic and poetic tradition are, like Macbeth, those in which the mythical creatures or ‘fairies,’ sing songs or speak incantations—moments of mystical and magical sensation.
The concept of fairies has direct ties to the mythical role of the Three Sisters from Macbeth. The term “fairy” derives from the Anglo-Norman French word, “fae,” meaning “faith;” which is ultimately rooted in the “Vulgar Latin fata” meaning “goddess of fate” in the feminine singular form, or “the Fates” in the neuter plural form (“fay, (n.)”). As we formerly observed from Holinshed’s Chronicles, the weird sisters were depicted as “goddesses of destiny…nymphs, or fairies,” implying an interchangeable term for the same form of mythical being (Holinshed 263). In this tradition, they were not necessarily considered benevolent creatures, but originated from “a wider tradition that identifies fairies with consciously evil and malicious aspects of the supernatural” (Woodcock 112). In Shakespeare’s time, they were often compared to wicked, demonic spirits of trickery, meddling in witchcraft and sorcery, for which Shakespeare calls the fairy, Robin Goodfellow “hobgoblin” and “puck” (I.ii.40).[22] Robin Goodfellow was a mythological creature with ties to Old-English folklore, “a sprite believed to haunt the country side” (“Robin Goodfellow, n.”). The terms “hobgoblin” and “puck” are interchangeable names for this mythological creature, all rooted in Germanic tradition and “unmistakably English” (Herbert 33).[23] Interestingly however, as the mythic scholar, Matthew Woodcock notes, “Shakespeare is chiefly lauded for having ameliorated fairies: divesting them of any negative associations found in…folklore (Woodcock 113). It is through this amelioration that we hear Oberon, King of Fairies, express “we are spirits of another sort,” and offer blessing and aid to humankind rather than mischief (III.iii.389). While the fairies in A Midsummer Night’s Dream are a more benevolent form of the mythic creatures, they still uphold and represent the old traditions of Celtic and Anglo-Saxon legend, and demonstrate this archaic sentiment of folklore through the language of their mystical speeches.
As previously mentioned, the fairies do not always use the language reflective of Old-English poetry. It appears that Shakespeare evokes this tradition when introducing the fairy realm in order to distinguish it from that of reality, and when the fairies are directly engaged in activities typically attributed to their mythical origins, including songs, incantations, and mystical interactions with the human realm. Thus, the fairies often converse in iambic pentameter, but they carry out mythical actions with the ancient sound of Anglo-Saxon tradition.
The first encounter that the audience has with one of Shakespeare’s fairies is in Act I, Scene II where Robin Goodfellow asks another fairy where it wanders, to which it replies:
“Over hill, over dale,
(I.ii.2-5)
Thorough bush, thorough brier,
Over park, over pale,
Thorough flood, thorough fire”
This fairy encounter presents a drastic shift away from the lines of iambic pentameter and prose which proceed this speech and which characterize human conversation throughout the play. Here, Shakespeare introduces the fairy realm with the sound of Old-English poetry, ostensibly attempting to elicit archaic sentiment through the linguistic divergence. These are ancient spirits who speak, and they talk as if they have wandered for thousands of years, maintaining their original language. In this excerpt, the diction is entirely Germanic in its roots, the meter is trochaic tetrameter, and there is a strong presence of alliteration as well, all serving to distinguish these characters as separate from the realm of reality.
This fairy’s speech, which consists of 16 lines, while starting with trochaic tetrameter, gently fades into iambic pentameter in the last four lines. This enables the fairies to then converse in a seemingly natural voice, yet this shift only occurs after the audience has been introduced into the fairy realm:
“Those be rubies, fairy favours,
(I.ii.12-17 emphasis added)
In those freckles live their savours:
I must go seek some dewdrops here
And hang a pearl in every cowslip’s ear.
Farewell, thou lob of spirits; I’ll be gone:
Our queen and all our elves come here anon.”
The scene then proceeds entirely in iambic pentameter and verse as the fairies, including the king and queen, converse on subjects pertaining to fairyland, but not directly to the mythical actions of fairies. Thus, it is evident that Shakespeare uses this manner of speech to provoke the imagination of the audience and draw them into another world of myth and magic. Another instance when Shakespeare calls upon the ancient poetic tradition is in their song.
In Act II, Scene II, as Titania prepares to sleep, she calls the fairies to present “a roundel and a fairy song” (II.ii.1). The term “roundel” originates from the Anglo-Norman word “rundel…denoting various round or spherical objects” (“roundel, n.”). In the 12th Century it developed into a form of French poetry with a cyclical rhyme scheme, as well as a form of circular dance, both of which were understood and adopted in English society as well.[24] These would have been perceived as older forms of art as they paralleled other traditions such as the ballad which derived from Anglo-Saxon oral traditions, but was waning during the Elizabethan era.[25] Thus, the elicitation of this artistic form in the Fairy’s song would also have assisted the archaic sentiment of fairy myth. As the fairies sing, they likely would have danced in a circular motion as well, bringing attention to the pagan circular symbology of both the Celts and the Anglo-Saxon people; a shape also denoted by the same word, “roundel.”[26] Therefore, it is clear the songs are replete with archaic reflections, adding further mythical distinctions to the fairy realm and the speech of the creatures within it. They sing to Titania,
“Philomel, with melody
(II.ii13-23)
Sing in our sweet lullaby;
Lulla, lulla, lullaby […]
Come our lovely lady nigh;
So, good night, with lullaby.
Weaving spiders, come not here;
Hence, you long-legg’d spinners, hence!
Beetles black, approach not near;
Worm nor snail, do no offence”
This song is again, characterized by the insertion of Anglo-Saxon poetic devices evident through the meter, the alliteration in nearly every line, and the consonant clustering in phrases like “Lulla, lulla, lullaby,” “long-legged spinners,” and “Beetles black.” As the roundel poetic tradition does not necessarily possess these features, Shakespeare appears to have intentionally inserted them for the particularly antiquated effect which they induce within the fairy song.
The most prominent moments in this archaic form, however, like those with the witches in Macbeth, are those containing fairy spells, magic, and incantations. Every time either Robin Goodfellow or Oberon squeeze the magical flower juice upon another character’s sleeping eyes, they call forth this ancient sentiment through mystical chanting. In each of these moments, the fairies are directly participating in the mythic, folkloric activity commonly attributed to their supernatural realm, and therefore Shakespeare denotes their action with the ancient form of language. Oberon, enchanting the queen Titania within his own realm speaks,
“What thou seest when thou dost wake,
(II.ii.33-40)
Do it for thy true-love take,
Love and languish for his sake:
Be it ounce, or cat, or bear,
Pard, or boar with bristled hair,
In thy eye that shall appear
When thou wakest, it is thy dear:
Wake when some vile thing is near”
Here, we see the same structure and poetic devices as in the aforementioned moments of fairy interaction, indicating the mystical nature of the speech. Similarly, when Robin Goodfellow first meddles in the human affairs by squeezing the juice into Lysander’s eyes, he states:
“Pretty soul! she durst not lie
(II.ii.82-87)
Near this lack-love, this kill-courtesy.
Churl, upon thy eyes I throw
All the power this charm doth owe.
When thou wakest, let love forbid
Sleep his seat on thy eyelid”
Again the overt trochaic tetrameter, the alliteration, the compound clusters all follow the same linguistic pattern for the magical aspects of fairy interactions both within their own realm and outside of it, as it did for the witches in Macbeth as well. The puck, or Robin Goodfellow, also uses this form of speech when carrying out the orders of Oberon to influence the humans:
“Up and down, up and down,
(III.iii.396-400)
I will lead them up and down:
I am fear’d in field and town:
Goblin, lead them up and down”
The term “goblin” like “hobgoblin” is another word commonly used for the mythical creature, Robin Goodfellow. This speech is a direct cultural tie to the sixteenth century understanding of this mythic being who was “the rustic creature of folk tradition…[and] a descendant of agricultural deities sometimes attached to evil” (Well, 74). Thus, the statement “fear’d in field and town” directly reflects the mischievous spirit which the puck, hobgoblin character embodied.
Another interesting point on the use of this language in A Midsummer Night’s Dream is the manner in which it is used by Titania, the Fairy Queen. Given all her speeches throughout the play, she only uses this form of archaic language twice—once while dancing with Oberon after having been released from the flower’s spell, and again at the end of the play when leading the fairies in a blessing song over the home of newlywed humans. In the first instance, she states,
“Come, my lord, and in our flight
(IV.i.98-101)
Tell me how it came this night
That I sleeping here was found
With these mortals on the ground”
The distinction of this moment is that it is one of restorative love between the fairy king and queen, a direct result of the affects of Oberon’s magic. It also parallels that which will occur between the human lovers at the end of the play, when the relationships are restored to peace and tranquility. The linguistic difference, then, is important because it distinguishes the fairy realm from that of the humans, both affected by the transcendent power of fairy love which infiltrates and restores hope to both realms. This is again evident in Titania’s final archaic speech in which she states,
“First, rehearse your song by rote
(V.ii.27-30)
To each word a warbling note:
Hand in hand, with fairy grace,
Will we sing, and bless this place”
Here she directs the fairies to sing and dance in order to grace the home with their fairy blessings. This directly engages the fairies in the mythic activities typically attributed to their kind; although, rather than malicious interference and influence, they offer peace, restoration and blessing to the human realm—a Shakespearian twist to fairy mythology. Ultimately, it is clear that Shakespeare differentiates fairy speech from human speech by forming it with ancient sounds that evoke a mythic sentiment; and it appears that he intentionally forms their language to separate the mythic and human realms, and to cloak all mythical and magical actions, such as songs and incantations, with archaic linguistic embellishment.
III. The Tempest: Mythic Presence of the “Tricksy Spirit”
The spirits in The Tempest, those which are considered equal to the character Ariel’s kind, are referred to throughout the play by a wide variety of names. Prospero specifically calls Ariel his “tricksy spirit,” and designates the others that appear as “elves,” “demi-puppets,” and “goblins,” yet most frequently as “spirits” as well (V.i.33-36, 256). Ariel, himself, calls his kindred spirits, “sprites,” and “ministers of fate” (I.ii.382; III.iii.60-61). Caliban, Stephano, and Trinculo refer to Ariel as a “fairy,” and Gonzalo determines such presence and mystical interventions as from “gods” (IV.i.196, 211; V.i.204). They are evidently “shape-”shifting, able to be “invisible,” and “melt…into thin air” (I.ii.304-305; IV.i.150). This, of course, represents the characteristics of the English folkloric creature, Robin Goodfellow, the meddling puck and hobgoblin. The scholar in the field of English folklore, Wendy Wall, explains that “fairy incarnation was the rustic creature of folk tradition, who in the sixteenth century was lumped indiscriminately with elves, mermaids, giants, fairies, and even the English hobgoblin called Robin Goodfellow” (Wall 74). Similarly, as noted in both previous sections of this essay, the account in Raphael Holinshed’s, Chronicles, compares the three witches of in Macbeth’s story to “goddesses of destinie, or else some nymphs or feiries indued with knowledge of prophecie” (Holinshed 269). As Ariel refers to himself and his “fellows” as “ministers of fate,” it appears that the mythological origins of all of these names and characters lie in the “native English stock…[the] spirits…with links to German and Scandinavian folklore,” which evolved over time into the mainly ameliorated state of Shakespeare’s mystical realms (Wall 74).
It is interesting to note that while this play appears heavily laden with classical myth, through the explicit reference to the Roman deities Ceres, Iris, Juno, and Neptune, the references are merely representations through the bodies and beings of other creatures. Although the classical term ‘nymph’ appears many times throughout the play, it arises only in mimicry. Prospero commands Ariel to “Go make thyself like a nymph o’ the sea /…Go take this shape / And hither come in’t…” (I.ii.303-306 emphasis added). While Ariel mimics the form of a water-nymph here, it is clear that it is not what he actually is. Similarly, when Prospero commands Ariel to present a performance of music, dance, and drama to Miranda and Ferdinand, Ariel and his fellow spirits perform roles, mimicking the aforementioned Roman deities. Ariel himself plays the goddess, Ceres, making it clear that that, too, is not what he actually is. Thus, Shakespeare subtly turns classic mythology into distant legend, and Anglo-Saxon mythology into reality through the presence of these “coarse spirits…who were specific to England” (Wall 74).
While Prospero meddles with magic and sorcery, he is evidently dependent on his ability to harness the inherent powers of the mythical beings, as he himself is merely human: “Spirits, which by mine art / I have from their confines called to enact / My present fancies” (IV.i.120-123). As it is not his own inherent power, he does not speak with the ancient language of mythical beings, but he speaks as a stately human, in iambic pentameter or prose. Furthermore, it is interesting that the use of the Anglo-Saxon poetic language is almost entirely void within this play, arising only in moments of song. It is with music that the majority of the magical apparitions and interventions occur; Prospero too expresses, “…I have required / Some heavenly music… / To work mine end…” (V.i.51-53). This again evokes the aforementioned traditions of song and chanting in Anglo-Saxon folklore, in which the Weird Sisters from Macbeth and the fairies from A Midsummer Night’s Dream all participate. Thus, it is not surprising that the only time the Old-English poetic manner of speech is used in The Tempest, is during Ariel’s (and his fellows’) songs of apparition and enchantment. Apart from these musical encounters, Ariel speaks with regular language, matching that of his master, Prospero.
The first song that the audience hears from Ariel is an enchanting allurement of Ferdinand to Prospero’s cave, for his first encounter with Miranda.
“Come unto these yellow sands,
(I.ii.378-389 emphasis added)
And then take hands:
Courtsied when you have and kiss’d
The wild waves whist,
Foot it featly here and there;
And, sweet sprites, the burthen bear […]
The watch-dogs bark! […]
The strain of strutting chanticleer”
While the meter of this song is irregular, it contains several lines of tetrameter (marked in italics above), many of which possess the stress on the first syllable, demonstrating the Old-English stress pattern as well. Along with insertions of Anglo-Saxon poetic meter, there is a significant amount of alliteration, not generally present in Ariel’s conversational speech. He uses “wild waves whist” “foot it featly” and “sweet sprites…burthen bear,” as well as several other instances in the full text, making the song replete with this specific device. The majority of his diction is also Germanic in its origin, which further evokes an ancient sound. Similarly, when ordered to solicit spirits for the Roman play, Ariel responds,
“Before you can say ‘come’ and ‘go,’
(IV.i.44-48 emphasis added)
And breathe twice and cry ‘so, so,’
Each one, tripping on his toe,
Will be here with mop and mow”
In a song-like manner, and with his language, he indicates the use of mystical forces required to call forth the other spirits to join in the performance. The last three lines of this speech are all in trochaic tetrameter, and the first still maintains a four-foot stress pattern. His lexicon here is entirely Germanic in its origins, and it contains two instances of alliteration as well, indicated above in italics. Throughout the play-within-a-play which the spirits then perform, while they do not speak with an Anglo-Saxon stress pattern the entire time, they do insert thirteen overt compound words, adding to the noun-heavy sensation, as well as twenty-one apparent instances of alliteration, ostensibly intentional placements by the Poet to evoke a mystical sensation from their song, from which Ferdinand exclaims, “This is a most majestic vision, and / Harmonious charmingly. May I be bold / To think these spirits?” (IV.i.117-119). His recognition of the spirits as mystical beings does not come merely from seeing them them, but also from the sound of their voices, which he specifies with the word “harmonious.” Thus, the creatures again distinguish themselves from the realm of reality through the seemingly ancient sound of their language.
It is in this manner that Ariel sings throughout all of his magical interference within the play. He sings into Gonzalo’s ear to wake him from the sleeping spell before Antonio and Sebastian’s murderous scheme can be carried out, saying,
“If of life you keep a care,
(II.i.305-310)
Shake off slumber, and beware”
He sings as well as he transforms Prospero into the image that he once possessed as the Duke of Milan; and it is with music that the spirits present and remove the banquet table from Prospero’s castaway prisoners, at which they marvel, “What harmony is this?” (V.i.87-96; III.iii.18-20). With this musical presence, and with the strategic insertions of Anglo-Saxon poetic devices within the lyrics of the spirits’ songs, Shakespeare distinguishes the mythic realm from that of humanity by maintaining an archaic sentiment in the voice of his mythical characters.
IV. Conclusion: “Instruments of Reason” throughout History
These characters, while embodying and presenting linguistic traits of the Anglo-Saxon tradition, present more than just an archaic voice to recognize and distinguish their kind. The scholar, Walter Herbert, brilliantly portrays a deeper purpose for their intriguing presence and interactions within Shakespeare’s plays:
“How can [such shapes] convey a determined man’s power to control events? How can they appeal the virtuous? How can they suggest our kinship (or lack of kinship) with the rest of nature, or make demands upon our sympathies? How can they perpetuate blunders, or deceive other characters? How can they dramatize the fearsome lure of human ambition? Or how, by acting upon whimsies, can they comment on our itch to ascribe causes to events which we still have not learned to predict? Shakespeare’s apparitions in A Midsummer Night’s Dream as well as later in Macbeth and The Tempest did these things in combinations that held mirrors up to moral realities. As provocative as paradoxes in men, they became instruments of our reason.”
(Herbert 28 emphasis added)
As early as these myths were shaped into English history, folklore has been used for this purpose; to test, to imagine, to question, and to reflect the deepest aspects of the human condition, which Shakespeare channels through the personas of the mythic characters detailed throughout this essay. Yet, he strategically calls upon the tradition of English ancestry, the Anglo-Saxon people, to awaken his crowd of Old-English descendants to the same line of pensiveness and deep reflection. The manner in which he ties the old poetic tradition into the speeches of these characters, furthers their influence as “instruments of our reason,” linking their ancient minds to those in modernity, transcending time, and ultimately, furthering the profound conceptions of what it means to be human.
December 9, 2019
Works Cited:
Crystal, David. “The Language of Shakespeare.” William Shakespeare: The Complete Works, 2nd Ed., Edited by Stanley Wells, Gary Taylor, John Jowett, and William Montgomery. Oxford University Press, New York, 2005.
“Fay, (n.).” Online Etymology Dictionary, Douglas Harper, 2019.
Herbert, T. Walter. Oberon’s Mazed World. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, 1977. Holinshed, Raphaell. Holinshed’s Chronicles England, Scotland, and Ireland, England. Routledge, New York, 2006.
“Middle English, n.” Oxford English Dictionary Online, Oxford University Press, March 2002.
“Robin Goodfellow, n.” Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press, June 2010.
“roundel, n.” Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press, March 2011.
Shakespeare, William. “Macbeth,” “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” “The Tempest.” William Shakespeare: The Complete Works, 2nd Ed. Edited by Stanley Wells, Gary Taylor, John Jowett, and William Montgomery. Oxford University Press, New York, 2005.
Shamas, Laura. “We Three”: The Mythology of Shakespeare’s Weird Sisters. Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 2007.
Wall, Wendy. “Why Does Puck Sweep?: Fairylore, Merry Wives, and Social Struggle.” Shakespeare Quarterly; Spring 2001; 52, 1; ProQuest pg. 67-106.
“Weird, adj.” Online Etymology Dictionary, Douglas Harper, 2019.
Bibliography:
Brown, Peter. “Chaucer and Shakespeare: The Merchant’s TaleConnection.” The Chaucer Review, vol. 48, no. 2, 2013, pp. 222–237.
Duffell, Martin J. A New History of English Metre. Modern Humanities Research Association and Rutlidge, Cambridge, 2008.
“Hobgoblin, n.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2019.
Jones, Prudence; Nigel Pennick. A History of Pagan Europe. Routledge, New York, 1995.
Lambdin, Robert Thomas; Lambdin, Laura Cooner. “Old English and Anglo-Norman Literature.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Edited by Laura Cooner Lambdin and Robert Thomas Lambdin, Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002.
Lightsey, Scott. “Alliterative Poetry in Old and Middle English.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Edited by Laura Cooner Lambdin and Robert Thomas Lambdin, Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002.
“Middle English Dialects.” Harvard’s Geoffrey Chaucer Website, Harvard University.
Morgan, Gwendolyn. “Balladry.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Edited by Laura Cooner Lambdin and Robert Thomas Lambdin, Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002.
Teramura, Misha. “Shakespeare and Chaucer: Influence and Authority on the RenaissanceStage.” Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences, 2016.
“The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: First Century.” The Avalon Project: Documents in Law, History, and Diplomacy, Yale Law School.
“The Great Vowel Shift.” Harvard’s Geoffrey Chaucer Website, Harvard University.
Valdivia, Lucía Martínez. “Mere Meter: A Revised History of English Poetry.” ELH, Vol. 86, No 3, 2019, pp. 555-585. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Wall, Wendy. “Why Does Puck Sweep?: Fairylore, Merry Wives, and Social Struggle.” Shakespeare Quarterly; Spring 2001; 52, 1; ProQuest pg. 67-106.
“Weird, n.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2019.
Woodcock, Matthew. “New Directions: ‘Spirits of Another Sort: Constructing Shakespeare’s Fairies in A Midsummer Night’s Dream.’”A Midsummer Night’s Dream: A Critical Guide. Edited by Regina Buccola, Continuum Books, London, 2010.
Endnotes:
[1] Lambdin, Robert Thomas; Lambdin, Laura Cooner. “Old English and Anglo-Norman Literature.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002 (see pp. 1-3).
[2] Lightsey, Scott. “Alliterative Poetry in Old and Middle English.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002 (see pp. 37-39).
[3] See Footnote [1].
[4] “The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: First Century.” The Avalon Project: Documents in Law, History, and Diplomacy, Yale Law School, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/ang01 (see p. 17 of text from Footnote [1]); “Middle English Dialects.” Harvard’s Geoffrey Chaucer Website, Harvard University.
[5] “Middle English Dialects.” Harvard’s Geoffrey Chaucer Website; and Morgan, Gwendolyn. “Balladry.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002 (see p. 57).
[6] “The Great Vowel Shift.” Harvard’s Geoffrey Chaucer Website, Harvard University, https://chaucer.fas.harvard.edu/pages/great-vowel-shift.
[7] Valdivia, Lucía Martínez. “Mere Meter: A Revised History of English Poetry.” ELH, Vol. 86, No 3 (see p. 556).
[8] Peter, Brown. “Chaucer and Shakespeare: The Merchant’s Tale Connection.” The Chaucer Review, vol. 48, no. 2, 2013, pp. 222–237 (see p. 226); Duffell, Martin J. A New History of English Metre. Modern Humanities Research Association and Rutlidge, Cambridge, 2008 (see Ch. 6, especially p. 127).
[9] Ackroyd, Peter. Shakespeare: The Biography. Random House Inc., New York, 2005 (see page 59); Crystal, David. “The Language of Shakespeare.” William Shakespeare: The Complete Works, 2nd Ed. Oxford University Press, New York, 2005 (see pages l-liv).
[10] See pages 1-3 of text from Footnote [1]; Shamas, Laura. “We Three”: The Mythology of Shakespeare’s Weird Sisters. Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 2007 (see p. 11 for the mythic elements of these beings).
[11] Shamas, Laura. “We Three”: The Mythology of Shakespeare’s Weird Sisters. Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 2007 (see pp. 14-17); and “Weird, n.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2019.
[12] Shamas, Laura. “We Three”: The Mythology of Shakespeare’s Weird Sisters. Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 2007 (see p. 10 for Shakespeare’s derivation of plots).
[13] Examples of their use of blank verse: I.iii.4-6; Examples of their use of prose: I.iii.1-3, 60-63; III.v.1, 74; Other variations: I.iii.7-9, 46-48
[14] Holinshed, Raphaell. Holinshed’s Chronicles England, Scotland, and Ireland, England. Routledge, New York, 2006 (see Vol. I, Table of Contents).
[15] Wyntoun, Andrew. Original Chronicle of Andrew of Wyntoun. Edited by F. J. Amours, William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh and London, 1906 (see pp. 273-274, Ch XVIII, lines 1841-1912).
[16] Duffell, Martin J. A New History of English Metre. Modern Humanities Research Association and Rutlidge, Cambridge, 2008 (see pp. 125-127).
[17] Duffell, Martin J. A New History of English Metre. Modern Humanities Research Association and Rutlidge, Cambridge, 2008 (see pp. 73-77).
[18] Peter, Brown. “Chaucer and Shakespeare: The Merchant’s Tale Connection.” The Chaucer Review, vol. 48, no. 2, 2013, pp. 222–237 (see p. 226 for Shakespeare’s familiarity with Chaucer).
[19] Morgan, Gwendolyn. “Balladry.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Edited by Laura Cooner Lambdin and Robert Thomas Lambdin, Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002 (see pp. 56-57 for the influence of these forms).
[20] Shamas, Laura. “We Three”: The Mythology of Shakespeare’s Weird Sisters. Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 2007 (see p. 12 for Hectate’s role and influence).
[21] Shamas, Laura. “We Three”: The Mythology of Shakespeare’s Weird Sisters. Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 2007 (see p. 12 for Diana’s role in the fairy realm); Woodcock, Matthew. “New Directions: ‘Spirits of Another Sort: Constructing Shakespeare’s Fairies in A Midsummer Night’s Dream.’”A Midsummer Night’s Dream: A Critical Guide. Edited by Regina Buccola, Continuum Books, London, 2010 (see p. 121 for Titania’s origins).
[22] Herbert, T. Walter. Oberon’s Mazed World. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, 1977 (See pp. 48 for negative connotations of fairies); Woodcock, Matthew. “New Directions: ‘Spirits of Another Sort: Constructing Shakespeare’s Fairies in A Midsummer Night’s Dream.’”A Midsummer Night’s Dream: A Critical Guide. Edited by Regina Buccola, Continuum Books, London, 2010 (see pp. 112-121 for evil connections to fairy lore); Wall, Wendy. “Why Does Puck Sweep?: Fairylore, Merry Wives, and Social Struggle.” Shakespeare Quarterly; Spring 2001; 52, 1; ProQuest pg. 67-106 (see p. 74).
[23] See “Hobgoblin, n.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2019 (for relation of words to the same mythical creature).
[24] See OED “Roundel, n.” Under the Origin and Etymology sections.
[25] Morgan, Gwendolyn. “Balladry.” A Companion to Old and Middle English Literature. Edited by Laura Cooner Lambdin and Robert Thomas Lambdin, Greenwood Press, Westport, 2002 (see pp. 56-57 regarding balladry in Shakespeare’s day and its evolution).
[26] See OED “Roundel, n.” Under the Origin and Etymology sections; Jones, Prudence; Nigel Pennick. A History of Pagan Europe. Routledge, New York, 1995 (see pp. 209-210 for the significance of the circular shape).