'Take Up and Read'—the importance of the Bible in understanding the works of Shakespeare

Laurel Moffatt

When Shakespeare’s works were first published in 1623 (posthumously), they were prefaced by some helpful advice from two of his friends on how to read the plays. They advised the reader to buy the book first, and after buying, to ‘read him therefore; and again, and again.’  It was only after reading Shakespeare, perhaps repeatedly, that a reader would enjoy him, and it was only after enjoying this act that a reader would understand him.  For these friends and colleagues of Shakespeare, enjoyment necessarily preceded understanding. 

I think to some extent this remains true for us today; most of us will only stick with a book or play if it captures our attention and delights us in some way (unless very dry instruction is your cup of tea).  But Shakespeare’s first readers had a few advantages over current readers, which perhaps accelerated their enjoyment and understanding. For English readers in the first portion of the 17th century, Shakespeare’s source material, including English history, was in easy memory; the expectations for the genres in which he wrote were well known; and the English language was in the same form of irregularity, and so comfortingly familiar. Of course, we can get up to speed by using a scholarly edition of Shakespeare, which nudges us along defining all the strange words along the way, whispering tidbits about Holinshed and English history, or reminding us that tragedies are sad, comedies happy, and tragi-comedies sad and happy. But there is a lesser-credited difference between us and Shakespeare and his original readers:  the knowledge of Scripture.

Shakespeare's source material ... was in easy memory; the expectations for the genres in which he wrote were well known

There is no question among scholars that Shakespeare was well acquainted with the Bible. There are many Scriptural references in his plays; one need only consult works that catalogue the references to receive confirmation of this. But is this all a reader of Shakespeare needs to know? That Shakespeare, his audience and his readers knew their Bible? Or would it help a present-day reader to know his or her Bible as well?

It is one thing to know that Shakespeare knew the Scriptures well; it is quite another to know the Scriptures and understand Shakespeare’s works in light of the references and themes that he uses. I agree with Shakespeare’s friends that we should read Shakespeare, ‘and again and again.’  But, in order to get under the skin of his plays and truly enjoy and understand what we’re reading, it would help us to also read the Scriptures that Shakespeare obviously knew so well.  Reading the Scriptures, if only as literature, gives a contemporary reader knowledge shared by Shakespeare and his original audience, a group of people who, like Shakespeare, would have known the Bible and the Anglican Book of Common Prayer if not through their own private reading, then through their mandatory attendance at church services.

Being familiar with Scripture helps a reader to identify a Scriptural allusion, but also understand its significance for the meaning of a Shakespeare text.  Shakespeare did not simply string together Scriptural allusions, rather, there is an inter-textual quality to his use of Scripture, which adds to and affects the meaning of his plays and poems. For instance, Shakespeare could have chosen other settings for The Comedy of Errors, but his choice of Ephesus may signal to a reader that Paul’s letter to the Ephesians and his thoughts on children and parents, husbands and wives, and slaves and masters are relevant to the setting and content of this play.

In the case of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, it is easy to spot Bottom’s bastardisation of the words of St. Paul when he (Bottom) tries to figure out whether or not his dream was real. However, upon reading around in Scripture, we may find that Shakespeare uses Bottom’s lack of understanding in a way similar to how God uses the foolish to fool the wise, as Paul describes in his letter to the Corinthians.  Just as (in the words of the Geneva Bible) “God hath chosen the foolish things of the worlde to confounde the wise,” within the play Bottom shames the wisdom of Athens by revealing the power and reality of seemingly foolish dreams. Shakespeare uses specific Scriptural references but also larger Biblical themes of justice and mercy, love and death, resurrection and redemption.  Both an earlier tragedy like Romeo and Juliet, and a later tragi-comedy like The Winter’s Tale display the transformative and regenerative power of love, through death in the former play and a seeming resurrection in the latter, and in so doing mirror the effect of the death and resurrection of Christ as recounted in Scripture. Of course, knowledge of Scripture is useful for much more than the works of Shakespeare alone.  In Shakespeare and the Bible, Stephen Marx laments the dwindling number of readers who are actually familiar with the Bible, and while he cedes that a literary perspective might aid in the reading of Scripture, “knowledge of the Bible informs any reading of literature.” And in The Great Code: The Bible and Literature, Northrop Frye finds that because so many works of Western literature use biblical plots, imagery and references so liberally, these works “have become unintelligible to modern readers.”

... so many works of Western literature use biblical plots, imagery and references so liberally, these works “have become unintelligible to modern readers.”

Although many of us do not have a working knowledge of Scripture, and so may be unfamiliar with the underlying themes and references in Shakespeare’s plays as well as many works of Western literature, it is a problem easily fixed.  We must, like St Augustine famously did in the 4^th Century, simply pick up and read the thing!  However, there is a danger in reading Scripture.  If we take it at it’s word, then this is no ordinary piece of literature, but rather, something that lives and breathes, with power to read us even as we read it.  And, if we are anything like Dromio in Comedy of Errors, then we may shirk from being read and therefore known.  But, as in the case of Shakespeare, I think that the enjoyment and understanding gained is well worth this possibility.

Laurel Moffatt received her doctorate in English Literature from Catholic University of America in Washington, DC in 2006, with a concentration on English Renaissance.  Her dissertation was on Shakespeare and his use of nothing in some of his plays. 

27-Oct-2009 05:58 AM Carter
I think this is a brilliant essay and one that hints at a debilitating modern tragedy that is pandemic: poverty of the soul due to lack of proper nutrition. Good health depends crucially on nourishment of the body, mind and soul. A regular intake of Scripture feeds all three. Something pause and think upon, methinks. I wonder if Dr. Laurel could be persuaded to continue a public lecture on this?

Copyright © 2008 Centre for Public Christianity | Privacy Policy | 09-Oct-2009 09:03 AM | Powered by Business Catalyst