ABSTRACT
It is generally assumed that war in Shakespeare’s plays is a human affair. Only humans worry about whether or not a war is “just,” only humans fight for “holy” causes, and only humans seek immortal fame through acts of organized violence. But warfare in Shakespeare’s plays is much less human centered than critics have generally acknowledged. While it often makes sense to define war as “hostile contention by means of armed forces,” organized military violence “between nations, states, and rules”, in reading Shakespeare’s plays we must also consider an alternative definition: war as “active hostility or contention between living beings.” These two definitions are not mutually exclusive; indeed, the consideration of the latter radically alters our understanding of the former. Shakespeare presents us with a hylozoic, vibrant world in which human and non-human animals, vegetables, and minerals are entangled in what pre-Socratic writers such as Heraclitus, Empedocles, and Homer called “strife.” Organized, military violence in Shakespeare’s plays, in particular his tragedies, is a manifestation of strife on a much grander scale that encompasses all of nature. Focusing on Macbeth, Coriolanus, and Othello, this chapter argues that Shakespeare’s version of war as strife not only subverts claims of human exceptionalism, singularity, and superiority, it also forces humans to confront their ontological connection to nonhuman animals; moreover, the ecology of war leaves them unable to see themselves as autonomous, rational agents removed from the rest of nature.
