Another great article, Rebeka. I wondered if your use of 'quintessential' in '... a quintessentially Solomonic magical motif...' was an intentional pun, as the four elements and the fifth essence often appear in Solomonic practice as the Pentagram or Pentacle. The 'fifth element' AKA the 'quintessential' element.
It's always been an interesting dynamic--medieval and ancient sorcerers/occultists and their reputations built by early modern dramatists. I know this mostly through Roger Bacon and Albertus Magnus (who I study as historical people/scholars).
One of my favourite academic essays was a research dissertation into Roger Bacon and his afterlives/legacy, which is a really intriguing topic comparing the real man (and thinking with magic as a philosophical, even 'scientific enquiry') and his magick reputation, notably with Greene but most of history from the thirteenth century on. The best part is he essentially was remembered solely as a magician until the 20th century, when a few historians tried to revive him on the basis he was a proto-scientist through his early empirical method.
Amazing how it swings this way and that when the fact is the real Roger Bacon, the friar, scholar, and human, has been completely lost in both interpretations. Bacon's science was not (Francis) Bacon's science, and neither was his magic. Anyway, I'm rambling now and kicking myself I missed Nosferatu in the cinema--I loved the 20s version and I've been a huge Eggers fan for a while. Was gutted when he dropped 'The Knight'. Alas.
Absolutely, this is such a good point - and I contributed to this history by virtually ignoring the real Roger Bacon when I wrote about Greene in my thesis. To be fair, I did quote the real Bacon saying that the Solomonic books of magic ‘ought all to be prohibited by law,' which is ironic given his posthumous reputation. Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa probably has the coolest afterlife in folklore.
Great piece! While I’m not sure Eggers really spells out a timeline in the movie, the fact that his Orlok speaks Dacian implies he’s much older that your standard medieval or early-modern Țepeș-style Drac. He’d be late antique at the youngest, which is pretty wild. Loved the movie. Just astonishing photography throughout, even down to the slightly pornographic, contextually inverted Death and the Maiden image at the end.
Thanks so much, bill! Yes there is definitely still a bit of imprecision around Orlok’s origins - the moustache seems more medieval than antique. That shot at the beginning with the shadow on the curtain is one of my all-time favourite images on film
Agreed. Who knows, perhaps he’s some sort of Romano-Dacian magically-preserved corpse monster who just really liked the bold, manly moustaches of medieval Carpathia. He might be millennia old, but his fashion choices can be up-to-date! 🤣
Hey, if Gary Oldman’s Dracula can be Beau Brummel, and Anne Rice’s Lestat can be a rock star—the sky’s the limit for ol’ Orlok. At least once he finds a good dermatologist (enbalmer?)…
Thanks so much, Paul! I’d be interested to hear what you thought about it. I enjoyed it but felt that there were flaws; lots of people I’ve spoke with have absolutely loved or absolutely hated it!
Had been looking forward to reading this, and have now finally read and enjoyed (having seen the film)!
I very much like and agree with your perception of Knock-Orlok-von Franz as a continuum of various degrees of hubris, greed and mastery. I thought it was interesting that von Franz at multiple points invokes the protection of demons as well as angels, though also makes the sign of the cross - he is an almost pagan figure, appealing to all kinds of powers, though ultimately in pursuit of good.
(He also reminded me very much of Father Merrin from The Exorcist, which was a cool addition to the Dracula formula).
I also liked the detail that Orlok was a human sorcerer, as this seemed very much in the spirit of the original folklore around Strigoi, undead witches/vampires which contributed hugely to the general lore about vampires as we know them today.
The information about Grau's interest in magic is also interesting, as it sheds more light on the source material - lots of people want to dismiss the use of magical symbols in the original film as shorthand for anti-semitism and nothing more, and I don't know to what extent that's fair or accurate.
Thanks so much, Ashlander, I'm glad you enjoyed the article! I love the comparison with Father Merrin. I haven't written much about the history of antisemitism in depictions of magicians but there is a lot to explore there. Solomon was a Jewish king and ideas about his magical powers come to medieval Christians in part through the Jewish historian Josephus, but Josephus was an accepted authority figure and Solomon was part of the Christian faith so neither could be entirely dismissed even in an age of antisemitic persecution. It's one of those examples of having your cake and eating it in the Christian tradition: drawing on ancient Jewish sources and voices whilst caricaturing and abusing living Jewish people.
I've read that some view Stoker's description of Dracula as antisemitic and based on performances of Shylock in the Merchant of Venice - but I'd have to do more reading to fully explain what's going on in the vampire legends!
Yet *ackchewally* the ruination of a Romano-Magyar aristocrat through his initiation into the Solomonari rings false. Those sought by SATAN HIMSELF for training as Solomonari are said to have been peasants, not the warrior class: it was a group of initiates drawn from a particular caste, low but not the lowest. They are said to have been red-haired--another variant of the bum rap gingers always seem to get--and even to have been Jews. Marxist anthropologists would probably say something like 'It was a primitive folkloric myth meant to perpetuate and reaffirm feudal relations of production'...
In general I think this film, while very involving and memorable, fails in the sense that it's only half-committed to 'authenticity' (this is common in Hollywood of course). In addition to misunderstanding the Solomonari, they hired a linguist to 'reconstruct' the Dacian language--another ackchewally: his accent is presumably meant to be Dacian; no Romanian or Hungarian has an accent like that--but there are no texts *whatsoever* in Dacian, only a few words of disputed provenience and, granting that it even existed, nobody has spoken it for at least 2,000 years. The language they made up sounds great and adds much atmosphere, but it's not authentic.
Anyhow I realise none of this is central to what you are getting at. Good piece!
Edit: in place of 'at least 2,000 years' read 'nearly 2,000 years'.
I didn't know they were using the Dacian language (or a made up version of it), how strange! I wondered if they were following the book, and having Orlok's ethnicity as Szekelys (who claimed descent from the Huns) like the original Dracula.
I suppose the idea Eggers was trying to get across is that the Count is...very old indeed. If he was a Dacian he would already have been ancient in the mid-15th century (the time of the 'real' Draculea), and in order to have achieved such longevity he must have learned the arts of the Solomonari long before then. If so, he can't be 'Draculea' (son of the Dragon, ie the historical Vlad II Dracul).
In short, by trying to service historical authenticity Eggers made the whole thing historically incoherent. But it's an atmosphere piece, so who cares. In this sense *ackchewally* comments miss the point, as they usually do; for a particularly famous and hilarious example see George RR Martin's way-off quibbling about Tolkien's failure to specify King Aragorn's taxation policy for Gondor and the like.
Lol, I have written about GRRM's notorious tax policy quote before (my take is that it's hilarious because GRRM doesn't write about taxes either, he mostly writes about sex).
Thanks so much for this, this is a great caveat to a complication I've breezed over in the article and I think what you say is spot on. Eggers seems interested in moving (or at least, appearing to move in a 'half-committed' way) closer back to the original Eastern European legends, yet anachronistic choices continue to skew his noble vampire towards a Western European understanding of supernatural types.
In my PhD I used the metaphor of a shared rhizome to describe the older myths about a magical Solomon from which different traditions spring and, in most of those offshoots, Solomonic magic is practised successfully by the upper classes. Stoker seems to be informed by this when he collapses myths about the Solomonari into stories of predatory upper class rulers like Vlad the Impaler:
"The Draculas were, says Arminius, a great and noble race, though now and again were scions who were held by their coevals to have had dealings with the Evil One. They learned his secrets in the Scholomance, amongst the mountains over Lake Hermanstadt, where the devil claims the tenth scholar as his due. "
This composite figure of Dracula more closely resembles the Western European understanding of what a Solomonic magician looks like and it is this that Grau seizes on and expands in Nosferatu.
To be fair to Eggers, the film doesn't actually ever say that his vampire was a member of the Romanian Solomonari. We don't get a school in the mountains or Orlok riding a dragon. He's basically a Western European Solomonic figure shifted to a Romanian setting. Perhaps a more precise way of describing the connection is that the presence of the Solomonari in the original legends is referenced by Stoker which gives Grau, and now Eggers, ideas about exploring Solomonic magic in the Nosferatu films, but these are ultimately all stories told by Western Europeans and period-accuracy is always playing second fiddle to their personal interests in the Solomonic occult.
Ah that’s interesting, I must have missed them using that word. If that’s the case then Eggers is following Stoker even more closely in imposing Western European sensibilities on Eastern European myths because the local women should know that Orlok doesn’t fit the type usually selected for the Scholomance.
I suppose it makes it even starker that Eggers is interested in the concept of a Solomonic vampire sparked by the presence of the Solomonari in the legend, but cares more about what that figure might mean in the English/German magical tradition than in the Romanian. Making him both a noble scholar vampire in a castle AND a Romanian Solomonari suits the story he’s trying to tell even if it undermines the film’s claims of historical accuracy.
Absolutely fantastic, Dr. King!! Love the connections, erudition and precision you bring! When I heard Willem Dafoe's character literally cite Dee's Five Books of Mysteries in his first lines, I was beaming ear to ear in the theater!
Thanks Alex - I thought you'd enjoy this one! I'd like to sit down with the film once it comes out on streaming services and revisit all the little details, I'm sure there are loads more easter eggs...
*me resisting the urge to say * "Yes, many more Easter EGGERS...." Sorry not sorry, hehe. Yes, absolutely, Dr. King! Your post covered so much in such a lucid way, and I agree: in theaters I could only see it once, and would have *loved* to have paused and taken notes! Also can't wait until it's on streaming...
That is such an eggcellent point, Dr. King. (Actually, I need to stop because getting into a pun-exchange with someone of your intellect is a BAD idea.)
Yes, Claire, now I can understand why they call Nosferatu« Solomonari», which I believe has something to do with Solomon, and the crosses etc. All this is new and intriguing to me.
It’s rather cheesy but Blue Oyster Cult’s “Nosferatu” is awesome, for the theme.
Excellent analysis, Rebekah. I saw the movie just after Xmas, a worthy companion to seeing a “Sweeney Todd” - my kind of “seasonal,” haha. I need to see it again now that I’ve read this.💕
Do you think Prospero would qualify as a case of "Solomonic Exceptionalism"? My dissertation work--too many years ago now--sought to defend the thesis that, despite Prospero's "Art," the play is not antithetical to Christian belief, but informed by it, especially in the emphasis the play places on mercy.
To put it briefly, I agree with you and yes, I think Prospero is a magician who resembles Solomon and uses magic wisely and with restraint. Unlike Faustus, he knows when to walk away! Friar Bacon is like this too, from Robert Greene's earlier play 'Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay' and its sequel 'John of Bordeaux.'
It was kind of you to make your dissertation available to me. I read all of your fourth chapter and conclusion with great interest.
Since I teach Macbeth, your commentary on that play was illuminating. It had occurred to me that a possible parallel could be drawn between Macbeth's seeking out the Weird Sisters in 4.1 and Saul consulting the witch of Endor. I hadn't considered the Macbeth-Malcolm dichotomy as a Saul-Solomon contrast. Your reading of it makes much more sense of Malcolm's testing of Macduff than I had previously considered. I'd always thought of it in terms of Shakespeare cultivating more ambiguity about the use of equivocation in the play, but your connection of the scene with Solomon determining the actual mother of the disputed baby really resonated.
My dissertation on The Tempest posits a biblical parallel with the action of the play through a web of allusions in the dialogue and the incidents that make up the plot. Interestingly, in an essay I published based on my thesis, I devote a section to contrasting The Tempest with The New Atlantis, as you do. I hadn't thought of Bacon's work as being a harbinger of the transmutation of alchemy, magic, etc., into the empirical wonder-working of the scientific revolution; so I found your analysis there particularly enlightening.
Your thoughts about the Marcolph character also held great interest for me. I wasn't familiar with Marcolph; and, as I looked into that character, I wondered if you would consider Falstaff as taking on the role of Marcolph, paired with Prince Hal's/King Henry's Solomonic king?
Finally, at this point, the only familiarity I have with Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay is the frequent mention made of the play in David Mitchell's sitcom, Upstart Crow. I'll have to find a copy of Greene's play to read, as well as its sequel John of Bordeaux.
Thank you so much for reading my thesis and offering such thoughtful comments! I think you're absolutely right about Falstaff/Hal being a possible Marcolph/Solomon parallel. I didn't quite have time to fit it into my PhD but there is some fascinating stuff in 1 Henry IV about Owen Glendower being a magician and Hotspur making fun of the idea so there's very much an awareness of magical hierarchies and the construction of authority. Hal is learning to be a good king in part by learning how to handle an unruly subject like Falstaff. Falstaff's ability to play around with language is quite Marcolphian, although he is a lot friendlier and jollier than Marcolph. Greene is an interesting figure - I do recommend Friar Bacon and Friary Bungay although John of Bordeaux is less good and harder to find. I'd be interested to read your thesis!
There's no digitized copy of my dissertation, at least that I'm aware of. I wrote it that long ago! However, I can share with you the article that is a spin-off of my thesis. It contains a fair amount that's included there. The article does focus much more than my dissertation on the meta-theatrical aspects of the play. It's also much shorter, so there's that. Here's a link that will give you access:
It sounds like you got a lot more out of the latest Nosferatu than I did! (Though I was amused by the "Van Helsing" character dissing science but then showing that his best weapon against the vampire was kerosene -- not actually available to us ordinary mortals till years after the events of the story.) But... surely, given the Herzog version, here was the perfect opportunity for a segue to Kate Bush's work by way of Florian Fricke and Popol Vuh?
Ah yes, the man who turned Kate Bush down! I've ignored the Herzog film in this article just to stop it sprawling too much but it's extremely cool that we nearly had a Nosferatu song from her...
Another great article, Rebeka. I wondered if your use of 'quintessential' in '... a quintessentially Solomonic magical motif...' was an intentional pun, as the four elements and the fifth essence often appear in Solomonic practice as the Pentagram or Pentacle. The 'fifth element' AKA the 'quintessential' element.
Oooh no I didn’t do that on purpose… but I might pretend I did!
Hehe, go on, I won't tell.
It's always been an interesting dynamic--medieval and ancient sorcerers/occultists and their reputations built by early modern dramatists. I know this mostly through Roger Bacon and Albertus Magnus (who I study as historical people/scholars).
One of my favourite academic essays was a research dissertation into Roger Bacon and his afterlives/legacy, which is a really intriguing topic comparing the real man (and thinking with magic as a philosophical, even 'scientific enquiry') and his magick reputation, notably with Greene but most of history from the thirteenth century on. The best part is he essentially was remembered solely as a magician until the 20th century, when a few historians tried to revive him on the basis he was a proto-scientist through his early empirical method.
Amazing how it swings this way and that when the fact is the real Roger Bacon, the friar, scholar, and human, has been completely lost in both interpretations. Bacon's science was not (Francis) Bacon's science, and neither was his magic. Anyway, I'm rambling now and kicking myself I missed Nosferatu in the cinema--I loved the 20s version and I've been a huge Eggers fan for a while. Was gutted when he dropped 'The Knight'. Alas.
Absolutely, this is such a good point - and I contributed to this history by virtually ignoring the real Roger Bacon when I wrote about Greene in my thesis. To be fair, I did quote the real Bacon saying that the Solomonic books of magic ‘ought all to be prohibited by law,' which is ironic given his posthumous reputation. Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa probably has the coolest afterlife in folklore.
Great piece! While I’m not sure Eggers really spells out a timeline in the movie, the fact that his Orlok speaks Dacian implies he’s much older that your standard medieval or early-modern Țepeș-style Drac. He’d be late antique at the youngest, which is pretty wild. Loved the movie. Just astonishing photography throughout, even down to the slightly pornographic, contextually inverted Death and the Maiden image at the end.
Thanks so much, bill! Yes there is definitely still a bit of imprecision around Orlok’s origins - the moustache seems more medieval than antique. That shot at the beginning with the shadow on the curtain is one of my all-time favourite images on film
Agreed. Who knows, perhaps he’s some sort of Romano-Dacian magically-preserved corpse monster who just really liked the bold, manly moustaches of medieval Carpathia. He might be millennia old, but his fashion choices can be up-to-date! 🤣
Exactly!!
Hey, if Gary Oldman’s Dracula can be Beau Brummel, and Anne Rice’s Lestat can be a rock star—the sky’s the limit for ol’ Orlok. At least once he finds a good dermatologist (enbalmer?)…
There’s a short story in that…
That was super interesting. I haven't seen the movie but surely will.
Thanks so much, Paul! I’d be interested to hear what you thought about it. I enjoyed it but felt that there were flaws; lots of people I’ve spoke with have absolutely loved or absolutely hated it!
I expect to love it. Coppola’s version is great in my opinion.
I enjoyed it, it was good fun
Had been looking forward to reading this, and have now finally read and enjoyed (having seen the film)!
I very much like and agree with your perception of Knock-Orlok-von Franz as a continuum of various degrees of hubris, greed and mastery. I thought it was interesting that von Franz at multiple points invokes the protection of demons as well as angels, though also makes the sign of the cross - he is an almost pagan figure, appealing to all kinds of powers, though ultimately in pursuit of good.
(He also reminded me very much of Father Merrin from The Exorcist, which was a cool addition to the Dracula formula).
I also liked the detail that Orlok was a human sorcerer, as this seemed very much in the spirit of the original folklore around Strigoi, undead witches/vampires which contributed hugely to the general lore about vampires as we know them today.
The information about Grau's interest in magic is also interesting, as it sheds more light on the source material - lots of people want to dismiss the use of magical symbols in the original film as shorthand for anti-semitism and nothing more, and I don't know to what extent that's fair or accurate.
Thanks so much, Ashlander, I'm glad you enjoyed the article! I love the comparison with Father Merrin. I haven't written much about the history of antisemitism in depictions of magicians but there is a lot to explore there. Solomon was a Jewish king and ideas about his magical powers come to medieval Christians in part through the Jewish historian Josephus, but Josephus was an accepted authority figure and Solomon was part of the Christian faith so neither could be entirely dismissed even in an age of antisemitic persecution. It's one of those examples of having your cake and eating it in the Christian tradition: drawing on ancient Jewish sources and voices whilst caricaturing and abusing living Jewish people.
I've read that some view Stoker's description of Dracula as antisemitic and based on performances of Shylock in the Merchant of Venice - but I'd have to do more reading to fully explain what's going on in the vampire legends!
fascinating!
I dislike ackchewally comments...
Yet *ackchewally* the ruination of a Romano-Magyar aristocrat through his initiation into the Solomonari rings false. Those sought by SATAN HIMSELF for training as Solomonari are said to have been peasants, not the warrior class: it was a group of initiates drawn from a particular caste, low but not the lowest. They are said to have been red-haired--another variant of the bum rap gingers always seem to get--and even to have been Jews. Marxist anthropologists would probably say something like 'It was a primitive folkloric myth meant to perpetuate and reaffirm feudal relations of production'...
In general I think this film, while very involving and memorable, fails in the sense that it's only half-committed to 'authenticity' (this is common in Hollywood of course). In addition to misunderstanding the Solomonari, they hired a linguist to 'reconstruct' the Dacian language--another ackchewally: his accent is presumably meant to be Dacian; no Romanian or Hungarian has an accent like that--but there are no texts *whatsoever* in Dacian, only a few words of disputed provenience and, granting that it even existed, nobody has spoken it for at least 2,000 years. The language they made up sounds great and adds much atmosphere, but it's not authentic.
Anyhow I realise none of this is central to what you are getting at. Good piece!
Edit: in place of 'at least 2,000 years' read 'nearly 2,000 years'.
I didn't know they were using the Dacian language (or a made up version of it), how strange! I wondered if they were following the book, and having Orlok's ethnicity as Szekelys (who claimed descent from the Huns) like the original Dracula.
Szekelys speak Hungarian.
I suppose the idea Eggers was trying to get across is that the Count is...very old indeed. If he was a Dacian he would already have been ancient in the mid-15th century (the time of the 'real' Draculea), and in order to have achieved such longevity he must have learned the arts of the Solomonari long before then. If so, he can't be 'Draculea' (son of the Dragon, ie the historical Vlad II Dracul).
In short, by trying to service historical authenticity Eggers made the whole thing historically incoherent. But it's an atmosphere piece, so who cares. In this sense *ackchewally* comments miss the point, as they usually do; for a particularly famous and hilarious example see George RR Martin's way-off quibbling about Tolkien's failure to specify King Aragorn's taxation policy for Gondor and the like.
Lol, I have written about GRRM's notorious tax policy quote before (my take is that it's hilarious because GRRM doesn't write about taxes either, he mostly writes about sex).
Thanks so much for this, this is a great caveat to a complication I've breezed over in the article and I think what you say is spot on. Eggers seems interested in moving (or at least, appearing to move in a 'half-committed' way) closer back to the original Eastern European legends, yet anachronistic choices continue to skew his noble vampire towards a Western European understanding of supernatural types.
In my PhD I used the metaphor of a shared rhizome to describe the older myths about a magical Solomon from which different traditions spring and, in most of those offshoots, Solomonic magic is practised successfully by the upper classes. Stoker seems to be informed by this when he collapses myths about the Solomonari into stories of predatory upper class rulers like Vlad the Impaler:
"The Draculas were, says Arminius, a great and noble race, though now and again were scions who were held by their coevals to have had dealings with the Evil One. They learned his secrets in the Scholomance, amongst the mountains over Lake Hermanstadt, where the devil claims the tenth scholar as his due. "
This composite figure of Dracula more closely resembles the Western European understanding of what a Solomonic magician looks like and it is this that Grau seizes on and expands in Nosferatu.
To be fair to Eggers, the film doesn't actually ever say that his vampire was a member of the Romanian Solomonari. We don't get a school in the mountains or Orlok riding a dragon. He's basically a Western European Solomonic figure shifted to a Romanian setting. Perhaps a more precise way of describing the connection is that the presence of the Solomonari in the original legends is referenced by Stoker which gives Grau, and now Eggers, ideas about exploring Solomonic magic in the Nosferatu films, but these are ultimately all stories told by Western Europeans and period-accuracy is always playing second fiddle to their personal interests in the Solomonic occult.
'the film doesn't actually ever say that his vampire was a member of the Romanian Solomonari.'
A woman at the monastery does (I'd have to check again to be certain but I think I'm right). I take this as tantamount to directorial voice.
Ah that’s interesting, I must have missed them using that word. If that’s the case then Eggers is following Stoker even more closely in imposing Western European sensibilities on Eastern European myths because the local women should know that Orlok doesn’t fit the type usually selected for the Scholomance.
I suppose it makes it even starker that Eggers is interested in the concept of a Solomonic vampire sparked by the presence of the Solomonari in the legend, but cares more about what that figure might mean in the English/German magical tradition than in the Romanian. Making him both a noble scholar vampire in a castle AND a Romanian Solomonari suits the story he’s trying to tell even if it undermines the film’s claims of historical accuracy.
Absolutely fantastic, Dr. King!! Love the connections, erudition and precision you bring! When I heard Willem Dafoe's character literally cite Dee's Five Books of Mysteries in his first lines, I was beaming ear to ear in the theater!
Thanks Alex - I thought you'd enjoy this one! I'd like to sit down with the film once it comes out on streaming services and revisit all the little details, I'm sure there are loads more easter eggs...
*me resisting the urge to say * "Yes, many more Easter EGGERS...." Sorry not sorry, hehe. Yes, absolutely, Dr. King! Your post covered so much in such a lucid way, and I agree: in theaters I could only see it once, and would have *loved* to have paused and taken notes! Also can't wait until it's on streaming...
haha yes absolutely - I can’t wait for the DVD EGGstras…
That is such an eggcellent point, Dr. King. (Actually, I need to stop because getting into a pun-exchange with someone of your intellect is a BAD idea.)
This was a fascinating read. I never spot this sort of depth in films but now i can look out for it when i see this film...
Thanks Nick! I always enjoy delving into these weird little details.
I ignored all the solomonic stuff. Now I'm spellbound.
Leopoldo, do you mean that you hadn’t known about it before reading Rebekah’s essay?
Yes, Claire, now I can understand why they call Nosferatu« Solomonari», which I believe has something to do with Solomon, and the crosses etc. All this is new and intriguing to me.
It’s rather cheesy but Blue Oyster Cult’s “Nosferatu” is awesome, for the theme.
Excellent analysis, Rebekah. I saw the movie just after Xmas, a worthy companion to seeing a “Sweeney Todd” - my kind of “seasonal,” haha. I need to see it again now that I’ve read this.💕
Thanks Sheila! I LOVE Sweeney Todd...
Wonderful thanks for sharing this with us
Great background! Thanks.
Thanks, Bob!
Wonderful essay. Thanks!
Thanks so much, Ricky!
Do you think Prospero would qualify as a case of "Solomonic Exceptionalism"? My dissertation work--too many years ago now--sought to defend the thesis that, despite Prospero's "Art," the play is not antithetical to Christian belief, but informed by it, especially in the emphasis the play places on mercy.
Great question! Half of chapter 4 of my PhD is about The Tempest if you wanted to read my thoughts in depth https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/items/d3ee0c37-dabc-4310-bcd1-ea6f2198455a
To put it briefly, I agree with you and yes, I think Prospero is a magician who resembles Solomon and uses magic wisely and with restraint. Unlike Faustus, he knows when to walk away! Friar Bacon is like this too, from Robert Greene's earlier play 'Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay' and its sequel 'John of Bordeaux.'
It was kind of you to make your dissertation available to me. I read all of your fourth chapter and conclusion with great interest.
Since I teach Macbeth, your commentary on that play was illuminating. It had occurred to me that a possible parallel could be drawn between Macbeth's seeking out the Weird Sisters in 4.1 and Saul consulting the witch of Endor. I hadn't considered the Macbeth-Malcolm dichotomy as a Saul-Solomon contrast. Your reading of it makes much more sense of Malcolm's testing of Macduff than I had previously considered. I'd always thought of it in terms of Shakespeare cultivating more ambiguity about the use of equivocation in the play, but your connection of the scene with Solomon determining the actual mother of the disputed baby really resonated.
My dissertation on The Tempest posits a biblical parallel with the action of the play through a web of allusions in the dialogue and the incidents that make up the plot. Interestingly, in an essay I published based on my thesis, I devote a section to contrasting The Tempest with The New Atlantis, as you do. I hadn't thought of Bacon's work as being a harbinger of the transmutation of alchemy, magic, etc., into the empirical wonder-working of the scientific revolution; so I found your analysis there particularly enlightening.
Your thoughts about the Marcolph character also held great interest for me. I wasn't familiar with Marcolph; and, as I looked into that character, I wondered if you would consider Falstaff as taking on the role of Marcolph, paired with Prince Hal's/King Henry's Solomonic king?
Finally, at this point, the only familiarity I have with Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay is the frequent mention made of the play in David Mitchell's sitcom, Upstart Crow. I'll have to find a copy of Greene's play to read, as well as its sequel John of Bordeaux.
Again, thank you!
Hi Donald,
Thank you so much for reading my thesis and offering such thoughtful comments! I think you're absolutely right about Falstaff/Hal being a possible Marcolph/Solomon parallel. I didn't quite have time to fit it into my PhD but there is some fascinating stuff in 1 Henry IV about Owen Glendower being a magician and Hotspur making fun of the idea so there's very much an awareness of magical hierarchies and the construction of authority. Hal is learning to be a good king in part by learning how to handle an unruly subject like Falstaff. Falstaff's ability to play around with language is quite Marcolphian, although he is a lot friendlier and jollier than Marcolph. Greene is an interesting figure - I do recommend Friar Bacon and Friary Bungay although John of Bordeaux is less good and harder to find. I'd be interested to read your thesis!
There's no digitized copy of my dissertation, at least that I'm aware of. I wrote it that long ago! However, I can share with you the article that is a spin-off of my thesis. It contains a fair amount that's included there. The article does focus much more than my dissertation on the meta-theatrical aspects of the play. It's also much shorter, so there's that. Here's a link that will give you access:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZdcZhGzuqo0vy3VVTaa64TPLqUfkpV_O/view?usp=sharing
Is there an edition of Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay that you'd recommend?
I also came across this shop when I was driving through my old neighborhood in Dallas, Texas today.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/2EcbYMJY8Pzzm87q8
Oh you have to go inside and tell me what happens…
It sounds like you got a lot more out of the latest Nosferatu than I did! (Though I was amused by the "Van Helsing" character dissing science but then showing that his best weapon against the vampire was kerosene -- not actually available to us ordinary mortals till years after the events of the story.) But... surely, given the Herzog version, here was the perfect opportunity for a segue to Kate Bush's work by way of Florian Fricke and Popol Vuh?
Ah yes, the man who turned Kate Bush down! I've ignored the Herzog film in this article just to stop it sprawling too much but it's extremely cool that we nearly had a Nosferatu song from her...