When Pigs Fly Ben Jonson 1616 Play

Ever sat through a play and felt like the characters were speaking a language that was almost English, but not quite? You catch a phrase like "when pigs fly" and think, well, that's a common idiom, but where did it actually come from?*

If you've ever been digging through old texts or studying early modern English, you might have stumbled upon a specific, slightly strange connection between that ridiculous phrase and the works of Ben Jonson. It’s a weird intersection of linguistic history and 17th-century drama.

What Is "When Pigs Fly" and the Ben Jonson Connection

Most people use the phrase "when pigs fly" to describe something that is absolutely never going to happen. It's the ultimate expression of impossibility. But if you look back at the early 1600s, the imagery was a bit different, and the way people expressed impossibility was far more colorful—and often much more biting.

The Linguistic Roots of Impossibility

The idea of an impossible event is as old as human language, but the specific imagery changes depending on the era. We don't know for a fact that Ben Jonson coined the exact phrase "when pigs fly" in a single, definitive moment, but his plays from 1616 and the surrounding years are part of the massive shift in how English began to use animal imagery to mock human folly.

In the early 17th century, English was in a state of wild, creative flux. That's why writers like Jonson were taking the raw, often vulgar language of the London streets and polishing it into something that could work on a stage. They weren't just telling stories; they were building a new way to speak.

The Context of 1616

The year 1616 is a massive milestone in literary history. It’s the year William Shakespeare died, but it was also a peak year for Ben Jonson. Plus, jonson was the "other" giant of the era. While Shakespeare was the master of the poetic and the universal, Jonson was the master of the satirical and the specific.

He wrote about the grit, the greed, and the absurdity of London life. When we talk about "when pigs fly" in the context of Jonson's era, we're really talking about the birth of a specific type of English wit—the kind that uses the ridiculous to point out the absurd.

Why This Matters for Literature Lovers

You might be wondering why a silly idiom matters in a serious discussion about 17th-century drama. Here’s the thing — language is a living thing. The way we mock people today is a direct descendant of the way these playwrights mocked their characters.

Understanding Satire

Jonson was a satirist. Satire isn't just about making fun of things; it's about using humor to expose vice or foolishness. When a character in a Jonson play says something impossible, it's often a way to highlight their own delusion. They are so disconnected from reality that they believe the impossible.

If you understand the roots of these idioms, you understand the "teeth" behind the humor. A joke about a flying pig in 1616 wasn't just a cute metaphor; it was a way to call someone a fool, a liar, or a dreamer in a very public, very theatrical way.

The Evolution of the English Idiom

Most idioms don't appear out of thin air. They evolve through repetition in popular culture—and in 1616, "popular culture" meant the plays being performed at the Globe or the Blackfriars Theatre. Still, if a character used a certain type of absurd imagery and the audience laughed, that imagery became part of the collective consciousness. We are essentially living in the linguistic echo chamber of these early modern playwrights.

How Jonson Used Absurdity to Build Character

Jonson’s plays aren't your typical "happily ever after" romances. They are often gritty, fast-paced, and deeply cynical. He used absurdity as a surgical tool.

The Use of Animal Imagery

In the Jacobean era, animals were frequently used to represent human traits. On top of that, a fox was cunning, a lion was brave, and a pig... well, a pig was often used to represent gluttony, filth, or stupidity.

When you combine a "low" animal like a pig with an "impossible" action like flying, you create a perfect metaphor for a character who is fundamentally unworthy of greatness. It’s a way of saying, "You are so grounded in your base instincts that the idea of you achieving anything noble is as unlikely as a pig taking flight."

The Mechanics of 17th-Century Wit

Jonson’s writing style was much more structured than some of his contemporaries. He loved the "Comedy of Humors," a theory that people were driven by specific bodily fluids (blood, phlegm, yellow bile, black bile).

If a character was "too hot" or "too cold," their dialogue reflected that imbalance. The use of absurd, impossible scenarios—like the concept behind "when pigs fly"—served to highlight these imbalances. It was a way to show the audience that the character was out of sync with the natural order of the world.

The Role of the Audience

We have to remember that the audience in 1616 wasn't sitting in quiet, dark theaters. Worth adding: they were loud, they were drinking, and they were looking for entertainment that felt real. When a playwright used a punchy, absurd phrase, it was meant to land immediately. It was a way to bridge the gap between the high-brow themes of the play and the low-brow reality of the spectators.

Common Mistakes in Interpreting Early Modern English

When people try to analyze plays from this era, they often fall into a few traps. Understanding these can help you appreciate the complexity of Jonson's work.

Taking Everything Literally

One of the biggest mistakes is assuming that every strange phrase in a 17th-century play is a literal statement or a direct quote from a specific source. Which means language was much more fluid then. Phrases were often "in the air," evolving through oral tradition before they were ever written down in a script.

Misunderstanding the Tone

People often assume that because a play is a "comedy," it's meant to be lighthearted. With Jonson, that's rarely the case. His comedies are often quite dark. If a character is being mocked with absurd imagery, it's often a harsh social critique rather than a lighthearted joke.

Overlooking the Social Context

You can't separate the words from the world they were spoken in. The class distinctions in 1616 were massive. Day to day, the way a nobleman spoke versus how a servant spoke—and the idioms they used—was a huge part of the characterization. If you miss the social hierarchy, you miss the subtext of the jokes.

If you found this helpful, you might also enjoy how to find the total resistance in a parallel circuit or how many thousands are in a billion.

Practical Tips for Reading Jacobean Drama

If you want to actually enjoy reading Jonson or his contemporaries, you need a strategy. You can't just breeze through it like a modern thriller.

Don't get hung up on every word. If you hit a word you don't know, keep going. Often, the context will tell you exactly what it means.
Look for the "humor." Try to identify what specific trait the playwright is mocking. Is it greed? Is it vanity? Is it stupidity?
Watch for the animal metaphors. Whenever an animal is mentioned, stop and ask: what human trait does this represent?*
Read aloud. These were plays meant to be heard, not just read silently. The rhythm of the language often carries more meaning than the literal definitions of the words.

FAQ

Did Ben Jonson actually invent the phrase "when pigs fly"?

It's unlikely he invented the exact phrase in its modern form, but he and his contemporaries were instrumental in developing the type of animal-based absurdism that eventually evolved into the idioms we use today.

Why is 1616 considered such an important year for English drama?

It marks a peak in the development of the English Renaissance, specifically the era of Jacobean drama. It was a time of immense creativity and transition for major figures like Jonson and Shakespeare.

What is a "Comedy of Humors"?

It's a genre of comedy based on the ancient medical theory that human temperament is determined by the balance of four bodily fluids. Characters

The Architecture of a Jacobean Comedy

Jonson’s jokes are rarely one‑liners; they are carefully engineered pieces of a larger satirical machine. The “humors” that dominate his cast are not merely personality traits but symbolic containers for social grievances. When a merchant boasts of his “lion‑hearted” courage, the audience is meant to hear not only bravado but also a thinly veiled critique of greed and exploitation. A typical scene will begin with a seemingly innocuous exchange, only to spiral into a cascade of metaphorical exaggeration that reveals the characters’ true motives. The humor therefore works on two levels: the surface comedy of grandiose self‑praise, and the subtextual indictment of the economic forces shaping the city’s underbelly.

Animal Metaphors as Social Barometers

Beyond the occasional “pig” or “ape,” Jonson peppers his dialogue with a menagerie that functions as a cultural thermometer. That's why a “crocodile” may signal hidden danger lurking beneath a polished veneer, while a “swan” can betray an affectation of elegance that masks vulgar ambition. Even so, these animal signifiers allow playwrights to comment on contemporary issues—such as the rise of merchant capitalism or the erosion of aristocratic privilege—without resorting to overt political polemic. Recognizing the animal’s symbolic weight therefore becomes a shortcut to the playwright’s broader commentary.

The Echoes in Later Drama

Jonson’s techniques left an indelible imprint on the trajectory of English theater. The Restoration playwrights, especially William Congreve and John Gay, inherited his penchant for satirical caricature, transplanting the animal idiom into more licentious contexts. Because of that, even the modern absurdist movement, exemplified by Samuel Beckett and Tom Stoppard, owes a debt to Jonson’s willingness to let logic dissolve in service of thematic resonance. In each case, the animal metaphor evolves, but its core function—conveying complex social attitudes through vivid, often grotesque imagery—remains unchanged.

Practical Strategies for the Modern Reader

Map the Menagerie – Keep a quick reference chart of the animals that appear and the qualities they traditionally represent in Renaissance thought. This mental glossary speeds up interpretation and prevents you from getting lost in the figurative fog.
Track the Repetition – Jonson often revisits a particular animal throughout a play to reinforce a thematic thread. Spotting these repetitions can illuminate the underlying critique.
Listen for Rhythm – The cadence of a line often mirrors the animal’s movement. A staccato, hurried phrase may mimic a hare’s scurry, while a drawn‑out, languid utterance can echo a turtle’s pace. Attending to this musicality deepens the experiential reading.
Contextual Research – A brief dip into contemporary pamphlets, sermons, or travelogues can provide the historical backdrop that enriches the symbolic reading. Knowing what a “fox” meant to a London audience in 1605, for instance, can transform a single line into a commentary on political intrigue.

Why the Idioms Still Matter

The animal idioms that Jonson popularized have survived because they compress complex human behaviors into instantly recognizable images. When we say someone “acts like a sheep,” we are invoking a cultural shorthand that traces its roots back to the same symbolic systems Jonson manipulated on stage. In this way, the playwright’s linguistic inventions are not museum pieces; they are living components of everyday discourse, still capable of illuminating contemporary attitudes toward power, vanity, and folly.

Conclusion

Ben Jonson’s comedies are more than comic entertainments; they are meticulously crafted social dissections that wield animal imagery as both scalpel and scepter. By decoding the menagerie that populates his scripts, readers gain access to a layered commentary on Jacobean society—its hierarchies, its hypocrisies, and its unbridled ambitions. The idioms that emerged from this theatrical crucible have endured, morphing into the everyday expressions we still use to label greed, folly, and pretense. But understanding these linguistic fossils not only enriches our appreciation of Renaissance drama but also sharpens our own ability to read the symbolic currents that shape modern language. In the end, the animal metaphors that once roamed the Globe continue to prowl our conversations, reminding us that the past, when properly decoded, still has much to say about who we are today.