Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: January ::
Re: Mote and Moth
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0085  Sunday, 17 January 1999.

From:           John Savage <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Sat, 16 Jan 1999 15:06:02 -0500
Subject: Q: Mote and Moth
Comment:        SHK 10.0068 Q: Mote and Moth

>recent editions of Midsummer Night's Dream
>differ in representing the name of one of Bottom's attendants.  Should
>it be Mote or Moth, and what is the textual evidence that has caused the
>split?

Charles Boyce, writing of the "Moth" in A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM: "His
name means-and in Elizabethan English was pronounced-'mote' and suggests
the tiny size of a speck of dust."

As you probably know, a "Moth" is featured in LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST, too.
Again, his name would have been pronounced "Mote" by Elizabethans.
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.