Early modern literature and politics alike are littered with the language of the classical elements. In particular, elemental language comes to the fore in William Shakespeare and John Fletcher's plays produced in the mid-portion of King James's reign. In this thesis, I argue that Shakespeare and Fletcher to use the language of air, water, and fire, in Pericles, Two Noble Kinsmen, and Bonduca, to mediate contemporary political concerns plaguing English earth. This elemental language shows how Shakespeare and Fletcher voiced the British people's wavering hopes and fears concerning James's hopes for imperial expansion and his concurrent inability to maintain his realm's lands, finances, unity, and national image. Although recent scholars have begun to focus on how elemental language often functions to elevate authorial status and to personify emotions, there is little recognition of how early modern playwrights use elemental language to speak to Jacobean political concerns. Understanding the political underpinnings of elemental language allows for a better understanding of the discursive relationship between monarch, playwright, and subjects.

This thesis explores how playwrights William Shakespeare and John Fletcher use the language of the classical elements, water, fire, earth, and air, to express early modern people's hopes and fears regarding the trajectory of the British nation. In particular, I analyze how Shakespeare and Fletcher use elemental language in their plays, Pericles, Two Noble Kinsmen, and Bonduca, to mediate fears of national degradation drawing from King James's imperial ambitions and mismanagement of the nation's natural and financial resources. I suggest that much like the people of today, early modern peoples also measured the success of their nation in terms of the well-being and stability of its elemental environment.

Master of Arts