If I hadn't read your comments on another thread about how you reject modernity, etc., and wish to recreate poems that might have been written in the 17th century, I would take this as a humorous send-up of that same ridiculous attitude. There's no way in the world anyone would mistake the language of this poem for authentic language of an earlier century. It's more like a Pig Latin translation of 17th century language, and it feels like that was your intent.
While I am not an expert on archaic grammar, I do believe that "hath" is a singular. Your use of it with the subject "stars" is so in-your-face wrong that it's part of what convinced me that this must be a send-up.
Anyway, you do create a context (wishing you were born in a different era) that makes using archaic language perfectly acceptable, unlike in your other poem where the archaic language was inexplicable. If you intended the archaic languge to be an accurate representation of how people spoke and wrote back then, I'm afraid you haven't achieved that. But if you intended a humorous send-up, the poem is more successful but still could lean a bit harder into the humor.
|