Introduction

Annotations in older books do neither explain the plot nor extraordinary events. Annotations usually explain the commonplaces of a lost age. Shakespeare is not annotated because his works are complicated. His plays are annotated, because the common knowledge of his era, the commonplaces of the basic view of the world, are lost. In order to understand Shakespeare's hints, jokes and puns, we have to know a lot about life in Elizabethan times.

Four centuries separate Shakespeare and his time - the Elizabethan Age - and our era at the end of the 20th century. Four centuries, in which our worldly and spiritual environment has changed tremendously. The Elizabethan world picture, their world view, differs drastically from ours. The basic view of the world, however, is difficult to describe. The common view of the world is necessarily something trivial. So, for example, "the conception of order is so taken for granted, so much part of the collective mind, that it is hardly mentioned except in explicitly didactic passages." These basic beliefs, however, are the very things that have changed in the last half of a millennium.

In stark contrast to the traditional belief held for thousands of years, Copernicus published 1543 his theory of the Solar System. His heliocentric view moved the Sun into the centre of the Universe. Earth was, according to the new theory, just another planet, like Venus or Jupiter. Earth was no longer the centre of the Universe, no longer the centre of God's creation. Humankind found itself living on just one of the planets and not in the focus of God's attention. Copernicus was very careful, as he knew that the publication of his theory might have endangered his sinecure at the bishop of Thorn. The book De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium was published only months before his death. Kepler and Galileo worked on his theory and made it popular half a century later.

The world, however, was in order for the Elizabethan Age. We have to understand the way in which our world picture has disintegrated during the last four centuries to get a grasp on the fixed order in which the Elizabethan Age saw and described the world. Our own world picture is clearly defined by its absence. We do not have any coherent theory to explain the phenomena of our environment. It is this very fact we have to keep in mind. Physicists today are looking for the Grand Unified Theory. The Elizabethans had a unified theory. They had a fixed system with which to describe and explain all phenomena in their environment. Anyone attempting to understand Shakespeare and his time without taking the firm world picture into account, will fail. Shakespeare's world was in order; ours is not.

1. Cosmos

"Nothing could be more obvious than that the earth is stable and unmoving, and that we are the center of the universe." The following excerpt from Caxton's encyclopaedic "Mirror of the World" (1481) illustrates a common belief from the early 16th century: "God formed the world all round like as is a pellet the which is all round; and he made the heaven all round which environeth and goeth round about the earth on all parts wholly without any default, all in like wise as the shell of an egg that environeth the white all about."

Learned people, however, did not doubt the spherity of the earth. Earth was set as a globe in the centre of the universe, orbited by the sun and the other planets. This geocentric view "fitted the available facts, was a reasonably satisfactory device for prediction and harmonized with the accepted view of the rest of nature." (An illustration of this theory will be found further down.) In 1543, however, the new heliocentric theory of Copernicus was published. It was widely regarded as irrelevant, as it did not change anything as far as practical matters were concerned. It was considered as a fancy. As the famous writer Jean Bodin put it: "No one in his senses, or imbued with the slightest knowledge of physic, will ever think that the earth ... staggers up and down around its own center and that of the sun". The Church did not see any necessity in banning the book as "Copernicus would not change the shape of the system, he simply changed the location of the bodies." And "De Revolutionibus was actually read in some of the best Catholic universities". With the turn of the century, however, things changed. Kepler, an astronomer from Austria, wrote two books titled Mysterium Cosmographicum (1596) and Harmonices Mundi (1619). In both books, he defended the new theory, correcting the mistakes Copernicus had made. Copernicus had been conservative in his views. He had chosen circles as orbits for the planets. He was also fascinated by the strange beauty of the concept of the five Platonic bodies. His view on the nature of the spheres, which had hitherto been left undecided, was clearly a step backwards: He saw the spheres as solid, existing crystal objects. Kepler improved this theory by turning the circles into ellipses, and also giving up the solid nature of the spheres. Galileo Galilei, an Italian scientist, was another scientist to fight for the heliocentric view. In his writing Sidereus Nuntius (1610) he defended the new system vigorously. "Until the telescope, the defenders of Christian orthodoxy felt no need to ban Copernican ideas." Soon, the Church started to intervene, and the theory of Copernicus and the supporting of it were banned in 1616. Information, however, had spread, and the learned people in Europe knew and understood the new heliocentric view. In Shakespeare's London, people were also familiar with the new ideas: "Recent research has shown that the educated Elizabethan had plenty of text-books in the vernacular instructing him in the Copernican astronomy, yet he was loath to upset the old order by applying his knowledge. ... The greatness of the Elizabethan age was that it contained so much of new without bursting the noble form of the old order."

Both theories existed parallel in Shakespeare's time. The Copernican system did not have any practical consequences. People either believed in one or the other of them or did not care at all. For all practical purposes, however, it is hard to imagine that a playwright would take the latest academic findings into account. As far as the general order of the Universe was concerned - it hardly mattered where Earth and Sun were put: The overall structure remained the same. Considering the many people who visited theatres on the South Bank, we have to assume that the old view, illustrated on the woodcut, was still in force.

2. Earth

Again as with the Cosmos, we have to differentiate between the facts we know concerning the Elizabethan Age and the facts or ideas that mattered to an Elizabethan audience at the end of the 16th century. America had been discovered 100 years before. Magellan had proven that the Earth was a globe in 1522, Drake had circumnavigated the globe in 1579. The famous victory over the Spanish Armada in 1588 made it possible to establish a world-wide network of trading posts. The East India Company was founded in 1600. In 1607, Jamestown/Virginia was founded by Sir Walter Raleigh. Britannia was on her way to rule the waves. Shakespeare himself would write a play about the age of discoveries and colonisation. The Tempest was written in 1608.

The brave new world of the age of discoveries, however, was not necessarily combined with a greater knowledge about the actual world. In Shakespeare's work, the modern reader is struck by several serious misconceptions. They demonstrate how truly limited the knowledge about the earth was. In the 16th and 17th century, the Hapsburgs were a powerful dynasty. The capital of the Austrian and Spanish Empires was Vienna. The setting of Measure for Measure is supposed to be Vienna, but looks like all the other Italian towns Shakespeare describes - be it Messina, Verona or Venice. Bohemia in The Winter's Tale has a coast-line, and the Ardennes in As you like it look as if Shakespeare did not have the slightest idea where they actually are.

3. The Divine Order Having set the stage - Cosmos and Earth - we should look in more detail on one aspect – the central aspect in understanding the Elizabethan world. "If Shakespeare in Henry VI, Troilus and Cressida, and Macbeth gives us his version of order, it bulks small compared with the different kinds of chaos that reign in all these plays. Yet Shakespeare's chaos is without meaning apart from the proper background of cosmic order by which to judge it." The whole creation belonged to the divine order. This divine order was usually called the "chain of being" or "scale of degrees."

"The chain stretched from the foot of God's throne to the meanest of inanimate objects." On the lowest level we find the "mineral kingdom". The only feature of it is pure existence ("est"). The next degree is formed by the "vegetable kingdom", where in addition to being, living is another feature ("est" and "vivit"). The "animal kingdom" can also feel ("est", "vivit" and "sensit") and only man can understand ("intelligit"). The woodcut above is not without moral implications. The author did not miss the opportunity to show the consequences of immoral behaviour. Humankind can descend on the scale of degree, if capital sins are committed. Only the virtuous and pious human is in full possession of all possible features. Vanity, gluttony or apathy cause a decline down to a level where humans only "are" and do not live, feel or think. Missing in this picture, however, is the top of the chain: The angels were ranking high above humankind. They were of a purely spiritual existence, unencumbered with the burden of the material world.

This chain of being links every living thing, great and small. The mineral kingdom has simple mud as the lowest level, and rubies and gold as the highest. The joint to the vegetable kingdom is moss, being immobile, but yet living. The lowest animals are oysters, as they have the sense of touch, but are as immobile as plants. The highest animal seems to be the elephant or the lion (theoreticians are not sure about that), the lowest humans seem to be peasants, the highest emperors. They come quite close to the lowest of the angels, who form the highest rank in creation. God Himself surveys all of them.

What seems to be of only scholarly interest has some serious implications on everyday life. "For that infinite wisdom of God, which hath distinguished his angels by degrees, which hath given greater and less light and beauty to heavenly bodies, which hath made differences between beasts and birds, created the eagle and the fly, the cedar and the shrub, and among stones given the fairest tincture to the ruby and the quickest light to the diamond, hath also ordained kings, dukes or leaders of the people, magistrates, judges, and other degrees among men." Sir Walter Raleigh: History of the World

The divine order is fulfilled in the divisions among people. God and the whole of his creation are represented in the fact that every human being has a superior and an inferior fellow human. Social ranks are hereby explained as God-given and unalterable.

"God created as many different kinds of things as he did creatures, so that there is no creature which does not differ in some respect from all other creatures and by which it is in some way superior or inferior to all the rest. So that from the highest angel down to the lowest of his kind there is absolutely not found an angel that has not a superior and inferior; nor from man down to the meanest worm is there any creature which is not in some respect superior to one creature and inferior to another. So that there is nothing which the bond of order does not embrace." Sir John Fortescue: On the Law of Nature

Cosmos and Earth, the social realities of humankind were all thought to be shaped along the will of God. The chain of being is the worldly representation of God's will. But what happens if the order is disturbed?

"Take away order from all things, what should remain? Certes nothing finally, except some man would imagine eftsoons chaos. Also where there is any lack of order needs must be perpetual conflict. [...] Hath not God set degrees and estates in all his glorious works? [...] Every kind of trees herbs beasts and fishes have a peculiar disposition appropered unto them by God their creator; so that everything is in order, and without order may be nothing stable or permanent. And it may not be called order except it do contain in it degrees, high and base, according to the merit or estimation of the thing that is ordered." Elyot: The Governor

The world without order is chaos. Disregard or rebellion against the divine order is a serious sin. Compared to "normal" sins, defying the divine order is not only defying God's laws, but also threatening the very existence of Creation itself. One link missing in the chain of being destroys the whole order. The Elizabethans were obsessed by the fear of chaos and the fact of mutability; and the obsession was powerful in proportion as their faith in the cosmic order was strong. To us chaos means hardly more than confusion on a large scale; to an Elizabethan it meant the cosmic anarchy before creation and the wholesale dissolution. The only way to keep the chain of being intact is to restore order. The sinner must necessarily find his way back to the old order or must be brought there. "The poor wanderer, wishing to return to himself, should first consider the order of things created by the Almighty; secondly he should compare or contrast himself with these; thirdly by this comparison he can attain to his real self and then to God, lord of all things." Milton: On time

We have now established the cornerstones of the Elizabethan World Picture. Cosmos and Earth, the chain of being and the concept of sin seem fundamental to understand Shakespeare's plays. We will now proceed to a close scrutiny of Macbeth. The aim will be to find hints as to how Shakespeare used his concept of the world in his plays.

4. Shakespeare and his World Picture

In several instances in Macbeth, the world picture is mentioned. Often it is alluded to, sometimes more directly mentioned: the world picture serves always as a background for a metaphor or a pun.

"Now o'er the one half world Nature seems dead [it is night], and wicked dreams abuse The curtained sleep" (II.1,49-51). Macbeth here talks about the night and the things that happen during the night. Interesting, however, is the notion that only half of the world is dead. This idea requires that Earth is a globe and not flat. Does Earth move or not? Is Shakespeare Copernican or not? The answer can be found 5 lines below: "Thou sure and firm-set earth, Hear not my steps..." (II.1,56-57). Earth is firmly set in the centre of the Universe. Macbeth is set in the geocentric, old world picture. The basic order of all things is in uproar from the beginning of the play: The first stage direction is "Thunder and lightning" (I.1). The weather indicates that things have gone wrong. As Tillyard puts it: "Equally common is the correspondence between disorder in the heavens and civil discord in the state." The witches then tell us how far the turmoil goes: "Fair is foul and foul is fair" (I.1,10). The way the former Thane of Cawdor dies shows furthermore how disturbed the situation is: Despite being a traitor and a rebel against his king, he dies most nobly (I,4,1-13). Obviously the supposedly ordered world is in turmoil. In contrast to this, the description of Macbeth's castle restores the atmosphere of calm peacefulness. Banquo and Duncan praise the castle as pleasant and the air as delicate (I.6,1-10). Everything seems in order again. In II.1,5, however, we learn from Banquo that the stars in heaven do not shine - in contrast to their usual "behaviour". Both is implied here by Shakespeare. The absence of the stars therefore is a bad omen and heralds the things to come. Tension rises in II.3. In line 50, only minutes before the murder is detected, Lenox describes the turmoil around them:

"The nights has been unruly: where we lay,

Our chimneys were blown down; and, as they say,

Lamentings heard i' the air; strange screams of death,

And prophesying with accents terrible

Of dire combustion, and confused events,

Some say the earth was feverous, and did shake."

The confusion expressed in these lines is taken up again by Macduff, who exclaims: "Confusion now hath made his masterpiece" (II.3,62), when he makes the murder of Duncan known.

The same night is described in the dialogue of Ross and the Old Man. It is one of the few moments where the chain of being is the topic of the dialogue. It is not directly mentioned, of course. It is an excellent example for Tillyard's point that the world picture is the underlying theme which is not mentioned, but referred to. In II.4, the Old Man describes the unnatural events which happened in the days and nights preceding Duncan's death. In II.4, 10 - 13, the Old Man says: "T is unnatural,/Even like the deed that's done. On Tuesday last,/ A falcon, towering in her pride of place,/ Was by a mousing owl hawked at, and killed."

The falcon is a strong and elegant bird of prey, the owl is a bird of the night. The falcon had a higher rank in the chain of being, the divine order, than the rather obscure owl. An inferior creature kills a superior one. This must be seen as a reflection of the other killing. Macbeth has killed a superior member of the order. Duncan as the king ranks higher than Macbeth. So both the owl and Macbeth, defy God's order. Killing somebody is a sin, but killing a superior is more than a sin, it shakes the very foundations of the cosmic order - or, as the Doctor of Physic puts it: "Unnatural deeds Do breed/unnatural troubles" (V.1,59).

The conversation continues with even wilder omens. Duncan's horses are said to have turned wild and left the stable, kicking and fighting against control. Then the Old Man says:  'T is said, they ate each other.

Ross replies: They did so, to th' amazement of mine eyes,/That looked upon't -

An owl killing a falcon might happen very rarely, but horses eating each other is absolutely impossible and against every rule. The world is out of order, the laws of Nature are broken. The murder of Duncan triggered a whole series of events, all unnatural, all of them defying the divine order. Malcolm describes the bad king in IV.3, 95-100. When he says that (he as) a bad king would "Uproar the universal peace, confound All unity on earth" (IV.3,99), he implies that exactly this is done by Macbeth. The comparison between nature and the state of affairs among the humans can be seen in another statement of Ross. He learns from Macduff that the king's sons are under suspicion of killing their father. He describes their act as "'Gainst nature still" (II.4,27). The second instance in which the divine order and the chain of being with its system of degree are mentioned. They serve as a background for a joke in III.1,91: Macbeth explains to the murderers how to kill Banquo. When they explain that they are men and know what to do, he says: "Ay, in the catalogue ye go for men". He means that disregarding the fact that they belong to the human species, they might be to stupid too do it: "Now, if you have a station in the file, Not i' the worst rank of manhood, say it; And I will put that business in your bosoms" (III.1,101-103). Macbeth refers to the subcategories the chain of being contains, the lower and higher ranks of humanity.

The chain of being was a simple system, understood by all people and most useful to explain anything around them. Contradictions, however, existed. The old, geocentric and the new, heliocentric view of the cosmos existed parallel to each other, and it took decades for the heliocentric view to gain predominant acceptance. Catholic and Protestant faith coexisted in England in Shakespeare's time as well. Christian faith and familiarity with Roman mythology did not rule each other out. It was possible for them to be faithful Christians and still allude to the ocean as "Neptune's reign." In Macbeth, we find plenty of hints referring to the world picture - mainly hints about chaos and order. I quoted these instances to show that the divine order really was the underlying theme in the play - and how it was disrupted. The chain of being was such a simple system. The quest for the Grand Unified Theory in modern physics can also be seen as the attempt to solve the contradictions in our modern world view. The quest for the Ultimate Answer to the Ultimate Question goes on. The Grand Scheme has not been found - yet.

Bibliography

G. B. Harrison: Introducing Shakespeare. 

E. M. W. Tillyard: The Elizabethan World Picture.