What ish in a Name? The Early Modern English Perspective on the Irish
April 21, 2015
What ish in a Name? The Early Modern English Perspective on the Irish
Help Received: None
Matthew Penaranda
Matthew Penaranda
April 21, 2015
Help Received: None
What ish in a Name? The Early Modern Perspective on the Irish
William Shakespeare’s plays are considered by scholars to be insightful artifacts into the culture and history of Early Modern England. Some of Shakespeare’s plays are subtle commentaries on the social conventions of his day and age, as in the case of the controversial portrayal gender roles in works such as The Merchant of Venice. On the other hand, works such as Henry V appear to be more straightforward in their reflection of the English perspective on the subject of politics and the interactions between the various countries of Britain. The relationships between the various British countries are complicated to say the least, especially between England and Ireland and that tempestuous alliance is portrayed throughout Henry V particularly in the actions and dialogues of King Henry and the English captain Gower with the other three captains from each country. This essay will discuss Shakespeare’s depiction of Early Modern England’s view of the Irish throughout Henry V with particular close reading and analysis of the four captains’ scenes.
Background knowledge into the history of England’s relationship with Ireland will facilitate understanding of Shakespeare’s portrayal of the Irish in his plays. Despite their cooperation, as depicted in the presence of the three captains, the colony countries were not without opposition to English authority. Rebellions were not uncommon despite the alliances between the British counties. A lot of the unrest stems from the martial conduct of England’s maintenance of its colonial territories. Barons and other nobility given domain over localities were particularly overbearing in their treatment of the Irish. Often times, the role of the English in Ireland was actively punitive in exertion of their authority instead of simply supervisory. This sort of rule was not without resistance. During the time that Henry V was written and its earliest performances, the Nine Years War was taking place. This is important historical context to consider when analyzing the appearance of the Irish, or lack thereof, in Shakespeare’s works. There are far and few references to the Irish despite the heated relations that England had with them. One take on the matter is that being controversial political material, writers and playwrights might have decided to avoid discussion of the tempestuous English and Irish relationship. Still, McMorris makes an appearance in representation of Ireland in support of England. The depicted loyalty to King Henry that McMorris and the other captains display through their presence amongst the English army against the French may serve as rhetoric that despite their differences the had a common enemy. Shakespeare’s portrayal of its colonies as valued allies may have been an attempt to ease the tension between the two countries. Moreover, there are certainly parallels between King Henry and Queen Elizabeth and the climates they faced during their rules. The French threat to Henry’s England in the play is almost definitely the Irish equivalent to Queen Elizabeth’s contention with rebellions in Ireland and conflicts there over the course of the Nine Years War.
The source of English exceptionalism and their condescending attitudes towards the other three countries lie in the colonial relationship between them. For one thing, the main protagonist of Henry V is King Henry himself and therefore the play revolves around an English perspective from beginning to end. The supporting nature of the three captains from Ireland, Scotland, and Wales mirrors their submissive roles to England within the colonial discourse. Such a relationship cannot endure without a sense of superiority over the lesser powers and the conception of stereotypes that categorize the other countries as such. Henry V serves to show the colonial relationship and particularly England’s control over the other countries.
Andrew Murphy, an expert on the history between Ireland and England, notes that Ireland had always been a point of concern in regards to English security observing that the island of Ireland could very easily “well serve as a launching point for… attack on the islands of Britain” (203). However, English trepidation towards their Irish neighbors was not so simple as their geographic position being a tactical weakness towards them. David J. Baker, who was particularly concerned with the stereotypes that the English conceived and identified and associated with the Irish, explores the consequences of predominantly English authority over its neighboring British countries including Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Of the three, Ireland recurrently offered resistance to English control despite their military authority and that sentiment was enduring even after Shakespeare’s lifetime. Baker observes the treatment towards Irish subjects of English rule without consideration for their loyalty as in the case of Captain St. Lawrence who had fought against the Irish rebels alongside English armies. Despite his service to the English monarchy and their intents in Ireland, St. Lawrence was arrested for indecent speech in the tavern despite his military service in support of the very same people that persecuted him. Baker argues that St. Lawrence was punished more so for his Irish background than whatever actions “indecency” he might have exhibited in the taverns (194). The persecution on the basis of his background is a result of the schema of the colonialist discourse between England and the countries they considered lesser to them. Similarly to the historical case of St. Lawrence, literarily McMorris ‘ characterization in the play is evidence of the stereotypes the Irish were subject to. The nature of colonial authority typically demands one party to exhibit superiority over the rest; England being the authority with Ireland, Scotland, and Wales being submissive to them.
Baker entertains the idea that Henry V is a patriotic work that justifies the “expansionism and xenophobia of a nation consolidating an empire” (196). Despite the inclusion of the captains representing the other countries, their dialogues are often resolved or dismissed by King Henry or some other English figure such as Gower and in doing so establish the English perspective is es as most valued. A more complex analysis of the dialogues of the captains of England’s neighboring countries may pay particular attention to the linguistics and how they reflect the stereotypes imposed upon the three captains. In contrast to King Henry’s eloquent and extensive speeches in the play, captains of the other countries are limited to seemingly trivial arguments amongst themselves in terse and informal speech patterns. For instance, McMorris’ speech very noticeably degrades as he engages in arguments. McMorris demands “What ish my nation? Ish a villain and a knave and a rascal? What ish my nation?” and a clear accent is emphasized in his speech as seen in “ish” in place of “is” (3.2.121-123). Read aloud and imaginably in most performances, the linguistic style of McMorris’ speech is broken and frankly almost impossible to take seriously. The thick and forced Irish accent acts to reflect the less than sophisticated nature that the English perceived the Irish of having. In the scene with the four captains, the captains other than Gower are no exception to the overly emphasized accents respective to their country of origin. Probably the best way to consider the Early Modern English perspective of its colony countries is to close read King Henry’s attitudes towards the three captains. Throughout the play he is clearly their superior. The scene following the dialogue between the four captains consists of a noticeably embellished and rhetorically powerful speech by King Henry, addressing the Governor to submit without resistance or face the wrath of his army, that comes as a euphonic prose in the wake of the cacophonous forced accents of the three captains’ dialogue. The absence of meaningful or extensive speech from parties other than King Henry reinforces the sentiment that the English identity supersedes that of its colony countries. The implications of the captains’ condescending attitudes towards each other suggests that they have subconsciously accepted their racial categories as being lesser to the English whom they do not dare speak outwardly against as they do amongst themselves. One should also consider the implications of the captains’ explicit prefixes of each other by their racial backgrounds: McMorris called the Irish, and Jamy denoted as the Scot. The exception to this distinction amongst the captains in this conversation is captain Gower who is never referred to by his English racial background. Emphasizing the races of the other captains categorizes them as different and outsiders to the apparently superior English.
Another point to consider pertaining to McMorris’ questions in scene 3 act 2 is what he means by his “nation.” Even reading the entirety of the passage over again does not seem to determine whether McMorris means to identify with his Irish background or his allegiance to England. Simply dismissing this line would dismiss a heated debate as to the extent of the English identity on the average Irishman at the time. Assuming he means England as his nation, the semantics of his speech suggest the overwhelming notion of English exceptionalism and its neighboring countries’ assumption of subordinacy. On the other hand, McMorris could have easily meant to identify his nation as an Irishman first and foremost and therefor would reflect the sentiment of resistance that was particular characteristic of the Irish. Lisa Hopkins’ close reading of McMorris and the other captains’ characters points out that Shakespeare made a particularly obvious and debatably etymological error in naming the Irish captain McMorris. The prefix of the Irish captain’s name is “Mc,” a common indicator of a name of Irish descent. Interestingly enough however, the latter of his name, “Morris,” is a generally a name of Anglo-Saxon or English origin. In this subtle naming, Shakespeare effectively brings into discussion a matter of identity that the subordinate Irish and other colonial counties may have felt; whether they predominantly associated themselves with their respective countries or their parent England. While we are still concerned with names, it should be noted that earlier texts had the Queen of France address King Henry as “brother Ireland” and that was apparently completely Shakespeare’s error, having the current events pertaining to Ireland on his mind while he wrote the play. This is testament to how relevant England’s interactions were with Ireland during this time. There are no reasons to justify why the queen would have referred to Henry as brother Ireland besides it being a writing error.
Henry V is a politically charged commentary on the relationship between England and its colonial territories. Imagining the play as an allegory for England’s interactions during the Early Modern era in England makes the French a metaphor for the Irish in Shakespeare’s day during the reign of Queen Elizabeth. The more direct allusions to the Irish, personified by captain McMorris, provides insight into the English perspective of the Irish. Shakespeare’s commentary on the culture of his day are enduring artifacts to the relationship between the two contentious country’s’ troubled past.
Works Cited
Baker, David J. “‘Wildehirissheman’: Colonialist Representation in Shakespeare’s Henry V.” Shakespeare’s History Plays. By R. J. C. Watt. London: Longman, 2002. 193-202. Print.
Hopkins, Lisa. “Neighbourhood in Henry V.” Writing Renaissance Queens: Texts by and about Elizabeth I and Mary, Queen of Scots. Newark: U of Delaware, 2002. N. pag. Print.
Murphy, Andrew. Introduction. Shakespeare in Print: A History and Chronology of Shakespeare Publishing. Cambridge UK: Cambridge UP, 2003. 38-59. Print.
Smith, Emma. “Shakespeare’s Irish History.” Shakespeare’s Histories. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2004. 203-13. Print.