In this article, Fallon talks about insults used in early modern english, and why they should be brought back.
In a world overrun by tired comebacks and profanities disguised as wit– the true art of insults has quietly died. Somewhere in between “L + ratio” and calling stuff “mid”, something important has been lost– the ability to insult with elegance and class. This is a case for bringing back Old English and early modern insults– not for the sake of sounding pretentious but because they are actually good. They were specific, they carried weight, and, most importantly– they stung without being dense. Buried in the history of English lies a vocabulary of insults that did more than just provoke– but describe, expose, and entertain.
Historically, insults were not just expressions of anger– but linguistic performances. In earlier eras of modern English, especially during the Renaissance and Elizabethan eras, insults were richly metaphorical and most of the time highly specific. Instead of calling someone “stupid,” one might call them a “clotpole,” suggesting not just low intelligence, but an awkward, almost sluggish presence. Rather than labeling someone as dramatic or vain, a word like “cox-comb” evoked a particular kind of foolish arrogance, with implications drawn from fashion and social presentation. In a culture where oral expression mattered and public communication was often preformative, the insult had to do more than sting– it had to entertain. In Shakespearean theater, characters delivered insults not only to injure but also to impress the audience. The essential goal was to shame someone and be admired while doing it. For example, in Shakespeare’s Henry IV, the phrase “Thou art a very ragged wart,” is used. Even calling someone “As thick as two short planks,” emphasizes their slowness.
However, interest in historical language and literature will always be relevant. Film, literature, plays, and even online subcultures have all contributed to fascinations regarding older words and forgotten expressions. Within this, there is opportunity– not to replicate the speech of past centuries, but to draw from it. Reviving older literary habits (including the art of insults) encourages a return to more expressive, and layered speech. According to The New York Times, “Human beings exhibit a wide range of complex feelings, levels of security and moral centers. We still jockey for social status, just as our ancestors did.” It has always been in human nature to insult and criticize, so it might as well be done with the sophistication of those before them. Another example lies with an event that is soon approaching– Prom. Back in the 16th century, "prom" was actually called the promenade dance, which sounds exponentially better.
The revival of these old insults is not a call for antiquated speech, but a case for linguistic precision, creativity, and depth. Reintroducing their spirit– if not their exact form– encourages more deliberate and expressive communication. Language is one of the most powerful tools humans possess– it reflects how people think, what they value, and how they relate to others. Choosing words that reflect those complexities, even in conflict, keep language alive.
The New York Times: A Brief History of Insults (And So's Your Mother)
Education First: 8 Shakespearean Insults to Win Arguments With Your Friends