Discussion Groups / English Usage / April 2009

I'll leave someone else to answer that. I haven't studied the history of
English.

It could well be. The character has chosen to use an archaic form for
effect.

According to Baugh and Cable, the shift appears to have been in the
late sixteenth and early seventeenth century:

   The regular ending of the third person singular in the whole south
   and southeastern part of England--that is, the district most
   influential in the formation of the standard speech--was -_eth_
   all through the Middle English period.  It is universal in
   Chaucer: _telleth_, _giveth_, _saith_, _doth_, etc.  In the
   fifteenth century, forms with -_s_ occasionally appear.  These are
   difficult to account for, since it is not easy to see how the
   Northern dialect, where they were normal, could have exerted so
   important an influence upon the language of London and the south.
   But in the course of the sixteenth century their number increases,
   especially in the writings which seem to reflect colloquial
   usage.  By the end of this century forms like _tells_, _gives_,
   says_ predominate, though in some words, such as _doth_ and
   _hath_, the older usage may have been the commoner.  One was free
   to use either.  In the famous plea for mercy in the _Merchant of
   Venice_ Portia says:

      The quality of mercy is not strain'd,
      It dropp_eth_ as a gentle rain from heaven
      Upon the place beneath: it is twice bless'd;
      It bless_eth_ him that giv_es_ and him that tak_es_

   It is worth noting, however, that in the trial scene as a whole,
   forms in -_s_ outnumber those in -_eth_ two to one.  Certainly,
   during the first half of the next century -_s_ had ecome universal
   in the spoken language.  This is beyond doubt, even though -_eth_
   continued to be quite commonly written.  A writer toward the
   middle of the century observes that "howsoever wee use to Write
   thus, _leadeth_ it, _maketh_ it, _noteth_ it, _raketh_ it, per-
   _fumeth_ is, &c. Yet  in our ordinary speech (which is best to bee
   understood) wee say, _leads_ it, _makes_ it, _notes_ it, _rakes_
   it, per-_fumes_ it."  It is altogether probable that during
   Shakespeare's lifetime -_s_ became the usual ending for this part
   of the verb in the spoken language.

                       Albert Baugh and Thomas Cable, _A History of
                       the English Language_, 3e, 1978, p. 246

No, he's just quoting exactly. Why should he modermise it?