THE ARDEN SHAKESPEARE THE ARDEN EDITION OF THE WORKS OF WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE All's Well That Ends Well: edited by G. K. Hunter Antony and Cleopatra: edited by M. R. Ridley As You Like It: edited by Agnes Latham The Comedy of Errors: edited by R . A. Foakes Coriolanus: edited by Philip Brockbank Cymbeline: edited by J. M . Nosworthy HAMLET Hamlet: edited by Harold Jenkins Julius Caesar: edited by T . S. Dorsch King Henry IV, Parts I & 2: edited by A. R . Humphreys King Henry V: edited by J. H. Walter King Henry VI, Parts I, 2 & 3: edited by Andrew S. Cairncross King Henry VIII: edited by R. A. Foakes Edited by King John: edited by E. A. J. Honigmann King Lear: edited by Kenneth Muir HAROLD JENKINS King Richard II: edited by Peter Vre King Richard Ill: edited by Antony Hammond Love's Labour's Lost: edited by Richard David Macbeth: edited by Kenneth Muir Measure for Measure: edited by J. W. Lever The Merchant of Venice: edited by J ohn Russell Brown The Merry Wives of Windsor: edited by H. J. Oliver A Midsummer Night'S Dream: edited by Harold F. Brooks Much Ado About Nothing: edited by A. R . H umphreys Othello: edited by M. R. Ridler Pericles: edited by F. D. Hoeniger The Poems: edited by F. T. Prince Romeo and Juliet: edited by Brian Gibbons The Taming of the Shrew: edited by Brian Morris The Tempest: edited by Frank Kermode Timon of Athens: edited by H . J. Oliver Titus Andronicus: edited by J. C. Maxwell Troilus and Cressida: edited by K. J. Palmer Twelfth Night: edited by J. M. Lothian and T. W. Craik The Two Gentlemen of Verona: edited by Clifford Leech METHUEN The Winter's Tale: edited by J. H. P. Pafford LONDON AND NEW YORK ~s.\7jJ 71 HAMLET INTRODUCTION 75 Press correction Q2 as the most authoritative text, is based primarily upon it. Extant copics of the Folio show press correction on eight pages of Earlier editors, who tcnded to follow F, still ofcourse incorporated Hamlet; but whatever the bibliographical interest of Ihis, it is of from Q 2 or its descendants passages which F lacks; and since scant te'xtual significance. The corrector was evidently less can. some at least of these were apparently cut before the foul papers ccrncd with accuracy than tidiness. He attended to obvious mis~ were transcribed (see abovc, p. 43), it is as well to recognize that prints and little typographical faults like turned letters a nd inked th e edi torial tradition fmm Rowe on has always included things quads; but it is apparent that he neither checked proofwilh copy which, though indubitably of Shakespeare's composition, wcrc nor made any serious attempt to discover or emend errors. Three probably nevcr spoken on the stage. In sccking to present the limes wrong or defective punctuation is put rigbt ; occasionally playas Shakespeare wrotc it rallier than as it was shortened and spelling is alLererl, most notably when the maimed burial rights adapted for pcrun·mance I do no morc than follow tradition. morc properly become rite.s (V .i.2I2). The only genuinely sub Even those who insist that a play is created only in the lheatre stantive variant is the correction of lalu to thanke at IJ. ii. 83. The would hardly, I think, prefer the contrary procedure ; and those existence in the uncorrected state of a page: set by Compositor E who like to imaginc that some passages were cut by Shakespeare and containing one wrong word-division and one rejected spell ing himself! will not quarrel with their rctention. While foll owing (a sunder, Crocodile) which also occur in Q2 is important as Q 2'S fuller version, I naturally include also anything pre~ rved corroborating the usc OfQ2. t Full details of the variants are given in F which I take 10 havc hcen lost from Q2; btl t all words and in Hinman, i.30I- 4. phrases in F which I judge 10 be playhou~e additions to the dialogue (sec above, pp. 62- 3) I omit.. Some readers may regret 4· THE EDITORIAL PR O BLEM AND THE PRESENT T~XT the disappearance of some words - like the exclamations '0 Vengeance' at II. ii. 577 and 'Ecsta!;y' at m. iv. 142 - whieh have The tex tual situation discusscd above confronts an cditor with the become part of the familiar text; but an editor who sees no reason following complications. Of three texts, each of the last two, for attributing them to Shakespeare while recognizing that they though largely substantive, owes something to its prcdecessor, often disturb metreftfrdT'lllnatic..scnSG-or-bgth.J: ' crnatiVC )' while the first, the only wholly independent text, has all the but to reject thel"ft Yct decision is sometimcs diJ(jeult as with unreliability of a memorial reconstruction. Q 2, the onc which IV. ii . '29, 'hide Fox, and all after alid v:tt"'18 , laue 1, a touch') ; stands closcst to the author, lcaves obscure a number ofpassases and where words occurring in F only arc more easily attributable which arc n o t rep re~e nted in the ",9..llrr1.wtiiiii ilr. 1fieseincludC to Shakespeare tha n to the actors (as with III. i. 32, 'lawful ( some, though not all'0)flnc Tamous cruxes (cf. above, p. 55). On espials) I accep' 'he yrobabjli'y of omissipJ1 bY-the Q2 the other hand, F contains passages not in Q 2 whieh are certainly composItors.. - I authentic as well as incidental additions almos t as certainly On 01ea.'i.'iumption that F inherits from a corrected quarl.o:-Tt\ spl.ll'iou s. In thc matter of variant rcadings, since F as well as Qr might in theory be expected to give the bettcr text. Sometimes, } reflects playhouse deviation from the Shakespearean original, agreement bctween thcse two does not authenticate a reading I. But st.'C abovc, p. 43 , n. I, pp. 55- 6. against Q2; and in view (}f Q 2'S partial dcpendence on QI, 2. For ruller justificOltion see SB, X III, 3'-47, esp. 4:2 - 3. Thc ucmon ~Slralion there ofthcall·ical accretiOIls hall, I think, been generally accepted . Some r('cr:nl a~'1"eernCnt he tween those two, especially in the first act, does not cditors (notably H oy, but a1:s0 in part Evans) have ai rcOldy 1xC.II pcrsuadw to authenticale a reading against I" . M oreover, with 1~ also de drop lhcm. The sole articulate ubjector to their omission - 0 11 th t ground thai pendent on Q2, agreement even between the two good texts what arises in performance- becumes an integral part of" the play - should in affords no guarantee, and it is obviously possible for all three texts logic wckollic with them F's cuts and cast-reductions (to say nothing of its memorial corruptiuns). No doubt he will approvc the Penguin c:ditor's in [0 be wrong together. The most famous instance of this is the dU!lion of an added piece of dialogue known only to the I'cported text Q" word pollox ( I '~ Pol/ax) at I. i. 66; but the crux at l. iii . 74, 'ofa most pcrhaJ>!i evcn sbare the pleasure of one reviewer in being thws given ' morc se lcc,', may be another. Hamiel ' for his money than ever before. Thc metaphysical qucstion uf what This edition, l.ike mos t others sincc Dover Wilson established lJamlel is is not one to be gone into here. Hul there may be something: to be said I. C( above, p. 66. for idemifying Shake:spc1lrc'S Hamlet with whatlhcre is evidence to believe thai Shakespeare wrote. , \ ~V 6 HAMLET \~ (.; INTROD UCTION ~p 77 as has been shown (pp. sg-60) , it does; but its reliability is of sidera tion in future tha n they havc always had; but the ques course no hig her than that of the manuscript it draws upon ; and tioned readings here are certainly defen sible and en·or nO more / si nce ulis was evidentl y at a greater remove froIll the aULOgra ph, than possible. Some textual scholars busy themsr.lves with calcula its 'corrocri ns' were in fact often corruptions, while the actual tions of the probable number of errors ; but sobering as stati stics process ofcorrectIng and per aps Iransc ri'bmgy; however carried may be, since they cannot locate the errors they presume, they Qut , gave opportunit y for more. Where variants appear to be in hardly authorize much looscning ofeditorial restraint. 1 It remains IdifIcrcnt lh«~ belief that Q2 rests on the foul papers naturally true that, even though F cannot corroborate Q2 in what it may \ gives it preference. ut the editor must be eclectic ; every va...riillJ.t have derived from it, agreement between them will more oftcn imposes upon him the lOesca)~ es . ¥-D hQicc... My be due to their both being rig ht than to the handing on of a juagmcnt WI1 0 te n confirm that of my predecessors but will mistake. [n some cascs, howevcr, as at I. iii. 74 (where all three occasionally go against it, as when I unhesitatingly follow Q2 at texts cha llenge if they do not positively defy both sense and #Il.ii.553 (her ) and F a t v.i.78 (o'rt O.1Jices) . uch decilions will metre) what most prevents editorial intervention is the laek of usuallY... be defeuded i" Ihc notes. Upon occasIon 0 1 variants any proposal for a plausible alternative. ~c to be rejected j for it se'C"ms clear that some F rcadings are In stage-directions I have normally followed Q2 in preference aucmpts at correcting deficiencies in Q 2 by not very inspired to F; but I have incorporated the additional directions of F and guesswork. vVhen the editor believes this to have happened, he QI wherc they specify action the dialogue implies or provide fo r Ineed aecon.l LO F no higher authority than belongs to later Folios .. its ordinary stage accompaniments (such as properties, noises, or :;;:.d editors: paver Wilson cst.ablisbcrl !he priR~t in such lights). Directions, however, which change what is called for by cases the editor should proceed not by accepting F but l~ Q 2 I have rejected. These would have their place in a record of aUCi"nplmg to cmcn~ i re1-ns tan tC"iii"Wh1 cn i nave done tlus the play's stage history rather than in its accepted text; but they ~"S at v.iu Jg.lcrc both texts are wanting, as at Iu.iv. '71 are of course given in the collation. Stage-directions added by and )"v .i.40, I have been assisted but not felt bound by previous later editors, i. e. all originating later th an F, are placed within attempts to fill the gap. square brackets; but brackets are not used for mere verbal varia QI has had its greatest value in suggesting the source of tions such as conventionalize the form of directions while leaving corruption whcre the two belter texts arc at variancc - in ex the substance unafTccted. These arc noted in Ihe apparatus when hibiting, for example, the proba ble contamination ofQ2 through the original wording may be of interest in itself, but othcrv.,ise its usc of its predcccssor or of F through the influcnce of stage not: e.g. Cum ali}s for 'with Others', but not Exeullt EmbasJodorJ performance. But, though instances are necessarily rare, I have (F Exit Ambass.) for 'Exeunt Voltemand and Cornelius'. The been glad to accept the guidancc ofQI when it confirms that both names of characters in stage-directions and speech-prcfixcs a re the other texts a re wrong. (Stt above, p. 36.) standardized without noticc. The newl y pcrccivt:d relation of the three texts, with Q2 con In the modernization of spelling the criterion must be that ceivably lakjng crrors from QI and F likewise from Q2, greatly accidents arc relinquishcd while substance is preserved; but it is enlarges of course the invitation to emend. I have little hesitation difficult, as all modernizing editors find, to know where to draw in acccpting T heobald's bawds for bonds at 1. iii. 130. The emenda the line. Some early volulnes in this series - unwisely as we now tion diesl at IV. vii. 56, though hitherto adopted only by Dover Ihink - permitted occasional archaisms, such as murther and u;/dt ; Wilson in a la te reprint, is beyond any question. Readings com but wi th the present general editors the practice has now changed. mon to Q 2 and F which have incurred suspicion include Iv.iii." If murdn- and muTther are, as one editor insjsts, ' more than variant smooth and eUCTI ('hypcrmetrical and tautologous' I) , IV.V.Jlg spellings', they a re no more than accidental variants of the same browl (F brow), v . ii. 274 ~auen (F Ileauen ) ; but these seem aU word. 'f o follow Q 2 in murlhe" its preponderant and so conceivably sufTiciently within the range of Shakespeare's carelessness for emendation to be resisted . Conjecturcs like slings for slings l. This is the fallncy tha t haunts all the cu rrent research on compositors. Useful as it is to have: knowledge of their slinu and the errors each was prone to, (m.i.s8) and sconce for silence (m .iv.4) may reccive more con- this can still not identify errors. What it may do is to give': confirmation ofelTors i. No~ wo !'\h y, p. 1,:,6. suspected on other grounds. 78 HAMLET INTRODUCTION 79
Shakespearean lon n, would logicall y involve printing also h Ull. I have retained the coll oquial forms OfQ2, and On the assunlp drtlh (l.'i.237) and fadom, (I. 'v.n), and even lid., (I. iii. 125), tion that the Q 2 compos itors were capable of occasional sophist \\-' jlh a rcsuJt tha t could nei ther be consistent nor a modern (('x l ica tion, I have introduced a f(:w from F (UI .ii. 235, v. i. 75, 9 1, etc.). a t a ll .! On the olher hand, modernization is not extended 10 O n tht: evidenec of Q 2 I have regarded "ry and Ilry beJore a grammar a nd vocabulary. 1 have not replaced such words as vowcl as the us ual Shakespearean forms instead of the more whiles a nd somtver with Lh cjr modern cquivaJen l", even though literary mint and thine, which are frequent in F ; and holding a gain lhis was already done in r. ~fy principle is to preserve archaic that the Q2 composiLOrs may so metimes have sophtsti catecl, ] forms in the following cases onl y : have adopted my a nd thy whenever they occur in either text. But (i) W here: they arc a ma tler n Ol of spelling Lut of gra mmar, as as I do not suppose tha t Shakespeare himsclf would necessaril y in Q2, 'hee ha th bore me' (F borru, v. i. 179), Q'2 slrookm be eonsistent, where mil1e a nd thine arc found in both texts r ha vc (HI.ii. 265) may become strucken (as in F) bil l. not stricken . made no emenda ti on. (£i) Where, as in whiles and somelJt r, or in silll for s;nCl!, the Elision is a very dtffieult m atter and not one to be determined archa ic '()n n may reasonably be regarded as a sepa rate word. In by the Q2 spelling. This will oft en aJlord a clue, but we can never this category the OED has been, though not an a rbiter, a useful be sure in an individual case tha t it reproduced the copy; and guide. even if we eould, we should not be entitled to assume tha t Shakc (iii) Where Ih e a rchaism is one to whieh rn od C' rn readers a re spear(:'s own spelling was systematic.: on the point. His pages in hauitumcd, so th a l in its contex t it is likely 10 seem less strange Sir ThomaJ' M ort, indeed, sugges t the contrary. I have never tha n the modern equivalent would. Thus in the context of deferred to a contracted spelling in Q 2 against thc obvious re II.ii·437 sallds will , ] judge, be more acceptable than salads. But quirements ofthc metre (e.g. ll. ii .97, UI .iij.6). In the past forms ] see no reason wh y margin in its ordinary munda ne sense of verbs the criteri on must unquestionably be the mctrical re (v. ii . 152) should cI isguise itself as margent. 2 quirement and not the Q 2 spelling. The Arden convention is to (iu) Where the archaic spelling indicates a pronuncia ti on tha t print 'd where the metre requires elision. -td where it does not is required for the verse. Thus I p rint crownet (Q2 cronei) rather (except that words ending in -ied arc not in any case contracted). than coronel (F) a t IV. vii . 1 7 1 and at I.iv. 82 follow F artire (for The ending -led takes no eli sion since it is necessarily syllabic, and which Q 2 futu re may bc a misprint) rather than the artery of Q5 with -red, -ned elision is always in the fi nal syllabic. I declin e to or the co ntracted arCry of ma ny editors. believe tha t a uistineti on ean or should be made between qlftr'd (v) Where the fo rm suggests a dia lect or coll oquia l usage. and off'rtd, poisorld and pois'ned on the basis of the Q 2 spelling. Some forms of course may belong to m ore tha n one category: Where the occurs before a vowel, Q2 usually marks the elision crowner (v. i· /l, 22 ), ] ta ke it, would be admissible in the third if (th') while F is lia ble to ex pand. But since Q2 could also expanu not alreauy in the fifth . But, unlike SOBle recent editors, 1 find no upon occasion (as shown by the umber for thumbe and the practice place for ncraldy (I. i. 90, 1I. ii. 452 ) 01' ,auiary (II. ii . 433). which, like of the same compos itors in reprinting Titus Alldronicus ) and the romage (I. i. 110), obtrude a n antiquarian pedantry. vVords which evidence suggests tha t the contracted form is more Shakes pearean, havc gone oul of usc should adapt to modern spelling. F Jarre (cf. I have chosen it wherever it occurs with metrical propriety in Ja ffe) is na turally acclimatized as Jar (lI . ii. 35 I), and mobled either texl. Thus 1 follow F atl.i.64 (where Q2 may be contam (n. ii ·4gB- 9) - though here the tradition which has rh ymed it ina ted by Q I), 1. iii. 45, II . ii.505. O ccasionall y Q 2 contracts un wi lh ennoblt'd presents us with a dikmma - is betler ma tched with metri call y and r expand - sometimes, as a t n. ii. 450, with the cobbl, d (spdt cobled in F COT. I. i. 194). By contrast the common support of F, a nd sometimes, as at v. ii .S56, without it. In all and in the sense of 'if' is left unchanged : it is the editors' an, other cases where elision is in qucstion I have been guided by Q 2 neither ori ginal nor modern, which here is artificiaL to the extent tha t I have used eontraetcd spellings onl y whcre it gives precedent. When, as often ha ppens, F aJone contracts, it has I . F occ:;uionally modernizes to murda but a t least once tla r. reverse. It doc:.~ no clear authority anu may possibly be mistakcn. For example, p(.' rmils both rOWlS in the Sil mc $pccc:h. Vile, the invariable fonn in Q '2, bcco m~ d/de in F "",ill'" t il t: composi tor is n. A moral st"('nlS clear. where Q2 has 'I am too much in the sonne' a nd F contracts to '2. Cr. note un ribboll, I V. vii. 7(j. 'I am too much i'th' Sun' (l.ii.67), it would be possible to prefer 80 HAMLET INTRODUCTION 8, 'I'm too much in the sun'. Where Q2 reads 'you are in the right' (L v. 132), it might be better to Contract ' you are' rather than prefixes, of variant nomenclature for the_same characters. insig nificant verbal diflerences in equivalent stage-directions are like read, as F does, 'you are i'th' right'. The retention of the un contracted Q2 phrase at least gives the reader the opportunity of wise ignored. Variations in line-division are recorded when they choi ce. The frequent failure of both Q2 compositors to provide are, or may be, metrically or bibliographically significant, but not when, as in F's frequent division of the first line of a speech, their for elision in pronoun- vero combinations (I will, he wiJJJ he interest is no more than typographical. With thf"-se cxceptions aJl would, etc.) suggests dlat Shakespeare himself may not have done F variants are naturally given. Owing to the extent of divergence so, and sin ce the rhythm may often be kept by running syllables together wilhout actual elision, the editor sJlould, ] think, be it would not be profitable, or indeed possible, to list the variants sparing of contractions. Si..milarly with the unaccented vowels in of QI ; but the agreement or QI with either Q2 or f where these polysyllabic words. It must be admitted that Q . herc is a very differ is usual1y noted, and its independent readings are occaslon a ll y cited, especially where thcy may conceivably assist in es tab dubious authority: it prints sulphrns at. 1. v. 3 but has just had lishing the t.ext . In the interes ts of both c1arity and economy and soueraigntie and desperate (I. iv. 73, 87) and will go On to adulltTat~ and 'troyttTous (J.v·42, 43). In these and otlier cases I have not to avoid the frequent repetition of such locutions as QI .ruhst.! it wished to mark an elision where the original does nolo will I hope be sufficient for me to remark here that while variants are cited in the spC"lling of the text in which they occur, where twO The problem of elision of course concerns verse only. The contractions that modern spelling permits in prose an~ limited to or more texts are listed as having the same variant the spelling those of colloquial speech. may be th at of the first only. Since Quartos later than the second and Folios later than the first were each printed from their The punctua ti on ofQ2 dese rves to be trea ted with respect both for the signs of intelligent handling and the presumed closeness of respective predecessor''S, thei r variants, when they arc not merely the tex t to Shakespeare. But the idea that it relies almost entirely errors, have only the status of editorial emendations a nti are upon the punctuation of its copy is imposs ible to endorse.l The accordingly noted only when they have intrinsic interest or Titus Andronicus reprint shows the compositors, though attentive historical importance. to their copy, ready to depart from it on occasion, and they may well have been tile more so when the copy was foul papers (see A word should perhaps be added on onc innovation in the above, p. 46 ). I have normally retained their punctuation where Commentary. Not all that has made H amiel the most discussed it seems compatible with sense and modern practice, bu t I have play in the world is mattcr for an editor; but there are numerous not hesitated to vary it as a modernized text requires. The detailed controversies on points of interpreta tion which no Elizabethans used commas or colons in many cases where modern annotator can ignore. It has become increasingly obvious to mc that annotation of this play, ifil is not to be hopelessly inadeq uate, writers would use full stops, which I have often therefore sub~ stituted. I do not subscribe to the view that to follow an Eljza~ canllol be accommodated, according to Lhe IlIuch-valued Arden uethan quarto in punctuating long speeches almost entirely with practice, at the foot of the page; amI this practical difficulty I have commas somehow makes them more dramatic. The dramatic sought to cope with by a compromise. While retaining the usual aims of Elizabethan pOinting will often be better fulfilled by format of a footnote-commcntary, I have supplemented this by a translating than preserving it. scries of 'Longer Notes'. The existence of a 'Longer Note' on any passage i5 always ~ig n allcd by the letters LN. r\ e v e rthcl es~ I have In the textual apparatus no notice is usually taken of spelling and tried in the footnote always to give a suffi cient gloss for the reader punctuation (including presumed mispriuts), except where tbey to get at lhe bare sense without having to look beyond the page; a n-eet, or may affect, the sense; of variations in spacing (as in a when he seeks supporting a rgument. he may perhaps be willing to. whilt, to day, mt thinks, a sundtr) ; or, in stage-directions and speech Since the determinant of the Lon g(-~ r Notcs, however, is primari.ly . the call on space, they arc necessarily miscellaneous. Some defend I . M SH, pp. 196-7. The rival hyperboles or Dover Wilson••('aJh.ing-ofsheer the readings of' the text, or debate interpretations. Some supply beauty') and the recent Pcnguin (,TIle punctuation is chaotic') may be allowed to cancel one another out. so urce material or conlemporary ill ustration of mauners or li nguis· tic usage; some, in however inadequate a sUlTImary, im.licate "------ [l2 HAMLET INTRODUCTION 83
a context of ideas. It is, moreover, only by means of Longer 'ghost which el'ied so miserably at the Theatre, likc an oysler~ Notes that one can do justice to the many questions which criti wife, Hamlet , revenge'. 1 It is usually assumed that the play thus cism has hy now made inescapable - like the question of Hamlet's acted at the Theatre was the same as the Hamlet of which age (sec v.i. 139- 57) or of the King's behaviour at the dumb-show Henslowc's Diary reoords a single performance at. Newington Butts (m.ii.133 S.D.). Some famous matters of debate find a focus in inJune 1594, and {hat this in turn was a revival of the Hamlet play Notes on single words, like fishmonger (II . ii. 174) Or nunnery akcady being sa,irizcd by Nashe in a famous passage in his (m.L 121 ). Other Notes range beyond word or phrase (Q engage Preface to Greene's Menaph on in 1589: with a whole speech. To take contrasting examples, Hamlet's soliloquy beginning 'To be or not 10 be' (Ill. i. 56~8) and Ophelia's I t is a common practice nowadays amongst a sort of shifting running commentary on her distribution of flowers (IV. v. 173- 83), companions, that run through eVCI'y art and thrive by none, to the one already too much disc ussed, the other - for this play leave the trade of Noverint, whereto tbey werc born, and busy strangely - too litlle, caJJ in Illy judgment for fresh interpretation. themselves with the endeavours of art, that could scarcely Latinize their neck-verse if they should have need; yct English Such speechcs as the recital about Troy and Pyrrhus (II. ii. 448 ( Seneca read by candle-light yields many good sentenecs, as 5 4), the Queen's desc rip,ion of Ophelia's dea,h (IV. vii. 165- 82), Blood is a beggar, and so forth; and uyou entrcat him fair in a Hamlet's apology to Laerlcs (v.ii.222- 40) cannot be properly frosty morning, he will afford you whole Hamlcts, ] should say understood if they arc merely viewed, as they have too oHcn been, handfuls of tragical speeches. But ... Seneca, let blood line by in relation to the motives and reactions of the characters. In the line and page by page, at length must needs die to our stage; editorial task of explanation, the Longer Noles have not their which makes his famished followers to imitate the kid in Aesop, least important function when what has to be explained is not who, enamoured with the fox's newfanglcs, forsook all hopes just the verbal meaning, which may even be plain enough, but oflife to leap into a new occupation; and these men, renouncing the place and purpose of a speech or episode in the play's large all possibilities of credit OJ' estimation, to intermeddle with design. Italian translations. . . (Nashe, iii·315- 16). In one othcr respect I am aware of departing [rom custom. It This passage not only vouches for the existence of the old seems to me a rational procedure when commenting on a modern. Hamlet playas early a~ 1589 but may be thought. t.o give a clue to ized text of Shakcspeare to give quotations from other aUlhors, the author of it. The fable of the kid, in any case more Spenser's save those whose language is that of an older period, in modern than Aesop's, % appears to be brought in less for its aptness than ~pclling too; and except when the original spelling is or may be for the pun on a writer's name. Although speaking of 'a common relevant to the point at issue, this is what I have normally done. practice', Nashe is focusi.ng on onc practitioner. For it cannot be The reader wiJI not be surprised therefore if references to a a coincidence that Thomas Kyd had been bam the son of a standard edition in old spelling arc accompanied by a modern scrivener; not keeping to this 't.rade of Noverint', t.ook to literary spelling quota tion. Occasionally, Jar the sake of intelligibility, I composition; not having bcen to a university, could be said to have not shrunk fi'Om modernizing punctuation also. have had a limited classical education; was nevertheless an imitator of Seneca, from whom he culled many sententious say 5. SOURCES ings in his Spanish Tra.t:edy and elsewhere; but forsook that The Ur-Hamlel occupation [or a new one when in 1588 he published The House· holder's Philosophy Scent J Ar.-r I SCENt:: 1.] F (Actlu P,imw. Scena Prima. ) ; not in Q2. S.D.] Q 2, F; Enfu two CtTlt il1el.s. QJ" FrOn(;Sal "/Jon hi!>' Post; En l~ r ) to llim, BcmarJo. Ca/Hll. 12- 11 .1 ..11 Q2 : /mm F. S. n. Stlllillt:Lr l The scene is thc plat* 'is dramalie:ll1y ironic.al ill view of all form of the b:lttlcmc.nlt:d castle:. that foIl0\\'5' (Dover Wilson). Cr. I. ii. '2 I]. 6. upon your hour J on the stroke of 1*'"'25. 1L:'t. your appointed lime. !l . mrl Empha tic. h ill the sentry n. much t"fltlkI] 'Tb ~lI\k s ' Wa.Il often on guard who hal the right to used as &ingular. cr. u. ii. 'J S; Ant. challenge. II. vL .n ('it libr:ral thanks'). 3. Limg l ij ~ I~ A*t'Vl! I \V!lether or 9. lick fi.l htar'-' Friln('Lsco's mclan not this i. the ronnal pa!IJword. as cboly. ro r which no r~n is given, often IUPpo.·\(' 42 S.D.] Q2,Qr; afler off F. 44. figure] Q2,QI; figure, F. 46. aJ Q.; 54. theel Q.2 ,QI; tbe:e, F. 64. he] Q2,QI; TJDI in F. th'] F; Ihe Q !?,Q , it F,QI . 47. harrows] F; hon-owes Q.2; horron QI. 48. Ques tion] 66. l'olacks] M aione ; pollax Q .:.>, F (Pollax), QI" Poleaxe F/, Pole·axe Rowe; 1'~Q l ; Spt".akc (0 Q2. 52. thce] Q2 , 1-~ Q.I" thee, ROUM. Polack Po/Jt.. GU. jump] Q.:.> ,QI; iust F. 42 . btating] striking, though the at v. i.I73. Though QI a nd F locut.o r is not the one it seeks. See before. Dowden remarks tha t the sugg("''Slion is rathe r of rhythmic n".gularizc here to it, bolh retain the next nOIe:. armour would be remembered and rcpc:tilioll than of a single st.roke. ma~lI lin e pronoun in I. Gt). In 1;1Ier 55. will not an;wn] GhosL'l. t'vell long pointed out; but the truth, I cr. to beat a drum, and Q I towling. sccnCi, he ami ;1 alternate, pal'll}' whcn qucstioned, will speak onl)' to think, is that althol1gh it la ler suilS Shakespeare to dale the victory ov(:r 42 S.D. Enttr Ghost. ] LN', at.'COrding as the Glu:r.i t is thought those for whom Lhe y h.\\'c a message. 44. Iht same] i.e. the same as on of in its charal·t.:r of apparition or as Cr. 1.i. J7G. Fortinhras on the day of Prince previous occasion!\. the spirit of I-IumJcl's J'alhr.r (sec e.g. 58. OI'1 't] For 01'1 where we U$e of, Hamlet's birth, he docs not at this like the King ] Nute the refraining TIl.iV. 136-8); hut it would be ....'rong sec Abboll 18 1. Cf. I.. 9'J:(F). stage attach any prec.ise date to it . from accl'pting that it is in f:tct the 10 look for any COllllislCnt d is tinction. 59. might] was Mill commonly lIsed ef. \' .i. 1 39 ~ 57 and lAo!. 61 . N OrWD)' ] the: King of Norway, King. cr. bdow, 11. 46-7. 50 ~ ' 2. B4, 47· hlrrro!tls J la cerrucs (OED 4)· in ilS original scnsc: of 'coukl'. C r. 11 2- 13; T.ii . qt!). 244. Doubt as to Cr. I.v.lfi. QI shows an intcrC!\f.ing I. ii. [41. the ckkr Fo rtinbra~. Thc combat is the Ghost's iJcnlity ill pn:senl fro m confusion, litH the Q~ JtQrrowu finds 60. lIlt Jtn.lib le . /wo/lchl the dt:s c:ribed II. 65 tT. the fir ~ 1. a prlCcedcnl in A Ilem,-d), for Sedilion assuraoce given hy the evidence Qf 65. frolt't/'J] A~ befitted" m:lrtial 1. 230 45. ;(IIolor1 (;1 L 3~ Ll"1. Thl)Ugh (153fi), 'They . . . horrowe wi th t.h e scnsc.~. tII·ouch, testimony. Cf. hero. Cr. ii. and n. L "l.lin, as l"tlitors r e: mark, was nc(;cs .~p 90. heraldry] heraldy Q2, Hcraldric F,Qr. 91. those] F,Qr .. th~e Q2. 71. my] F.Qr; mine Q2. 76. why1 F,Q.I.' with Q2, cast] F; cost Q 2, Q/. 92. or] Q2,QI; on F. 94. rcturn'd) F; relurne Q2. 96. eov'nanl] F; coma.rl QR; compact Q 1676. 97. article de!ign'd] 1'2; anicle desseigne Q2; Article d.csignc F; articles dcseigne Q3· are suspended. Cr. I . ii. 198. Applied subjetl) subject! (collccti ve), as in 10 midnight, 3S often (M etu. Iv. ii .59. l.ii.:13. cr. Meas. H.iv.27. 'The 86. emulau] emulous, cager to competent] suffIcient. Ilamlcl Slakes R3 v. iii. 180), it concentrates these general 5ubject to a wcll· wish'd excel. lands enough to rnaleh aU those of suggcllitions upon an t'xact point of king Quit their own part'. 08. this side of Qur known wo,ld] Fortinbras. timc, and so here, thollsh the hour i6. wJvol With ellipsis (Ihere is). ' r.: the whole western world (as we 9+. fdufn' e1] A loose usc, not to be is onc not twdvc (1. 42), it ha~ the cast] casting. should say)' (Dover Wibon). taken as implying that Fortinbras additional dfc.."C1 of reinforcing jum/J. 7(>-8. bra~1I connon . .. shipwrighLr] 89. compact) The st ress on lhe would have got back f>O$..~essions 70. 10 work (i1l )J to let my mind be A refif':Clion of Denmark's contero· second syflable is usual in Shakes· originally his. occupied (wilh). porary war pn:paralions under Chris· peare. 96. lite same CO;J'1I/wt] i.e. the 'com· 71. Ihe gWH and sco/JeJ Ihe general tian IV. A decade cadier Sir J erome 90. ltefa/dry) the recognized usages pact' or I. 8g. LN. drift, ::l..S c;ontmslCd with the 'parlicu· Horsey ( Trmlels, HakluYI, Soc., pp. or chivalry, or which the heralds were 97. c(1rriage .. " e1esign'e1l purport lar thought' (1. 70). 241- 4) had complained to C hrillt i Hath in the skirts of Norway here and there 100 Comes armed through our watch so like the King Shark'd up a list oflawless resolutes That was and is the question of these wars. For food and diet to some enterprise H OT . A mote it is to trouble the minu's eye. 115 That hath a stomach in't, which is no other, In the most high and palmy state of Rome, As it doth well appear unto our state, A little ere tbe mightiestJulius fell, The graves stood tenantless and the sheeted dead Bu t to recover ofus by strong hand 105 And terms compulsatory those foresaid lands Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets; So by his fa ther lost. And this, I take it, As stars with trains of /ire and dews of blood, 120 Is the main motive ofour preparations, Disasters in the sun; and lhe moist star, The source of this our watch, and the chiefhead Upon whose influence Neptune's empire stands, Of this post-haste and rummage in the land. 110 115. motel molh Q.a, mote Q4. Ilg.1 OmissiOlllllarked tifter this line! Jmnens. Bar. I think it be no other but e'en so. 120-3. ] As Q2; oJttr 128 Tschisdw:ilz. Well may it sort that this portentous fjgure occa5ion of the war. It! being 'armed' slak1 in the territorial and political ( 0 ( . lawlCc\S] Q2,QI" Landlesse F. 104 . As] Q2; And F, aceords with the danger of war. sense, as at I. 72. Christopber North 106. eompulsatory] Q2; ComplIlsatiuc F. 11 0. rummage) Q2 (Romadge), portentous] in the strict sense. Cr. (Blackwcod's, I..xVI, 252- 4) insists F (Ramage). 111-28.] Q:z; not in F,Qr. Lavater, I.i, 'Por/ell/um is that. whit;h that it implies 'at once Place a['l(.\ forsheweth some thing to come, as indwelling Power'. 'The high and unr<:buked, uncensured. pay but their) food. Rather they arc when strange bodies appear in the palmy state of Rome' thus corres ponds to Virgil's ' rerum . . . pul 100. skirts] outlYLng parts. to serve as 'food .. , 10 some enter air, or bb.1.ing slars ...' 101 . Shark'J up] gOl together by prisc·. cr. ncxt note. I 15. A mote it is ] Not, pace Dover cherrima Roma' (Cl!'Orgics, 11 ·534)' 11 7- 23.j FOI' the prodigies pre snatching up indi.seriminate' I>·, as a 103. a stomach1 'nle entcrprise is Wilson, because Horatio sees the ceding Caesar's de~H h , I.N. shark docs il.~ food. OED presents pcn;oniftcd by it s possession of a incidc:nt all insignificant hut because 'shark' as a va..iant or 'shirk', to trick stomach, or a spirit of daring, the it sets lip irrit:ltion in the (mind's) Itg. squeak] Ghosts tmditionaUy spoke in a thin shrill voice. In Ihe and hence to prey on otlH~r.I, in which stomach being traditionally the seat eye . Tilley M IISg. Thc Q2 moth this sense is strengthcnt'd by the of coul'age, Cf. Ccus. v.i.G6, 'If you is an alternalive, and probably a Odyssey the souls of Penclope's su itors (XXIV. predatory connotations of the noun. dare fight today, come 10 the field; ShakcspeMcan, spelling. cr, QF of squeak like bau 5). Cr. Aeneid, \'1.492-3, 'vocctn cxiguam'; The suggestion of the shark's ~av:lge If not, when you h:lVt: ~ t.omachs'. LU_ Iv.iii.157 and F of John Iv.i·9~ , rapac.it)· anticip<.ltcs lawleJJ. Cf. Sir There is a play (In thc literal semc, HS IV. i. '77, LocrinL, Ill. vi. 19, 'shrieking notcs'; Thoma! More (MSR, Addn II. 207-9), the slomach of the enterprise being to trouble] Hl1gh of St Chcr, com I.V.2 n. below. 120. As] The awkward eonncetion 'ruHianll liS their faneil:g wl'oughl .. supplied with 'food' in the shape or mentlng on Psalm iV.4 (see Vulgate, suggests possible omis~ion. LN. would .~ hal'k on you', :mcl Dover the 'lawless r t.:.~o lllt cs'. Ikl slc, 1504), distinguisht:5 bctween \Vi bon, NCS, pp. xxx\·i- x.'(xvi i. log. htlldJ fountain-head, origin, the sinful anger which blind!!., and 121. Disaskrs] signs of ill omen. A list] iiI. a catalogue of soldiers' as at lI . ii.55, the zealous anger which merely 'disas ter' (ef. L. as/rum) is etymolo gically 'an unfavourable aspect of a names, and so a In)Q p . 110. past-iuute] furious aClivity. troubles (turbot ) the eye for a time, fowhss resqlu/tsJ desperadoes. When cr. J. Ho. like a coll yrium, so that it may later star or planel' (OED), we sec Fortinbras's nlfn in Iv.iv they rumma.£:"/!'j (ofwhich the: QF readings see more dcarly. So the mind, no\\o' the mout .ftarl the moon (ef. Win/, are a well-disciplincd army. Shnkc ar<: Oterdy old spdlings), bustling troubled by the Ghost, may later I.ii. I), often called 'watery' with siX'are probably ehallg-cd his dcsi1;n acti.... ity, turmoil. Primarily a nautical sec what it betokens, a5 happencd reference not si mply to its pallid in counc of c;ompo:s itiofl, wil lI!- Jul tcrm for the removal and rearrange with the Roman portcnts Horatio light but to the belief that it drcw lip filling an original idea of introducing ment ora ship's cargo. now cites. The emphasis, however, is moisture from the !lea. I t has power a revenging son .....ilh an unruly mob of 111 -!l8.] With the omwion of this on prescnt perplexity rather than on over 'Neptune's empirc' thl'ough itJ followers by tl"aruUcrrin!o:" Iht.'Sc 10 p..'lSSage in F (and Qt ), cr. the: cu r at future clarifkatiun. control of the tidCli. 122. ;:,!fIumce] An a~tro l ()gieal 'in J.a cr l ~ (IV. v). Sft" Intro., pp, 100, I . iv, I 7- 38, and sec note there:. Ihe minJ'stye] Cr. I . ii. ,05 and n. nucncc' wru an emanalion by me:IIlS 142, and R ile lJ. Studl., ...."11:: . 101 ...... 3. 1 1 2 . sodJ ac;cord. Cr. Hj Iv. i.63: IIG. jJ(Jim.11 nourishing, with ref of which a hea\lcnly body exerted 102. l:Or1 denoting purpo!lc, nll~ MND "\" i. 55. "me appearllnec: or the erence to the palm as the symlX)1 of !>("n!>l: i, nm, as sotntlirm:s supPQS(:d, Ghos t :l.ccords wilh the face that vietory. Apparently a Slu~ k csr~ar can power over mundane thirth'S· that tJlt= resolute; are h in:-cl lor (no King H amlet is thl! tJUU/i01l or coinage. stands] depends. SC. I] HAMLET J 75 174 HA~IJ.ET [ACT I Ifthere be any good thing to be done Was sick almost to doomsday with eclipse. That may to thee do ease, and grace to me, And even the like procursc offcar'd events, Speak to me; 135 As harbingers preceding still the fates 125 Ifthou art privy to thy country's fate, And prologue to the omen coming on, Which, happily, foreknowing may avoid, Have heaven and earth together demonstrated o speak; U nto oLlr c1imatures and countrymen. Or if thou hast uphoarded in thy life 0 Enln GHOST. Extorted treasure in the womb ofearth, 14 For which they say your spirits oft walk in death, But soft, bellold. La, where it comes again . Speak ofit, stay and speak. The cock crows. I'll cross it though it blast me. Ghost spreads its anns. Stop it, Marcellus. Stay, illusion: 130 Mar. Shall I strike at it with my partisan? I rthou hast any so und or use ofvoice, Hor. Do ifit will not stand. Spcak to me. BaT. 'Tis here. 145 Exit Ghost. 124- fcar'dl Pcmntl-Cmig, conj. (',QU ier j [care Q2; fL"3rce Q3- I 2fl. c1imalul'cs] Hor. 'Tis here. Q2j dimaturc White, conj. Dyct. 130 S.D-J b .rpread.r his armes. Q2 (o/IP. Mar. 'Tis gone. 1,10-1); lit .rjJrtadf his arms. Q 1676j flof in F,QI . 13'2 - 3.] ..1s Pope ; om lint W e do it wrong, being so majestical, Q.,1'. To offer it the show ofvioience, 12 3. almost to doomsdll)'1 'al rno."l l 10 cvent foretold. Cf. It.eywood, Life the point or complete darkness, nf Mtrlin (16,p , fronrispiece), 'Merlin 134- 5.1 As Q2,Q 1i one line F. 137-8.1 As Q2i o~ line F,QI (subst. ). alluding to the biblical prophecy . . . His counu'y', omen did long 141. your] Q2; you F,Qr. '42 S.D.} Q 2 (opp. l.p- 2); flot in F,QI. that at the second coming of Christ sin cc forctell'. t43. at] F; nnl in Q2. 146 S.D] .tI.r Sissotl; a/ltr III F; not if! Q2. "the moon shall nol givr. her light" 127-8. titmon.Jtroud ... dilllaturtI] (Miltthcw x:.xiv. !.!g" (1Iel-fonJ ). C r. COtI. Liii.gl- 2, 'portentous things hitherto si lent, at length prepares 133 -4~ . If· .. If· .. Or if . .. JlfIy 124. /JUlurse] lhal which precedes Unto the climate that they point and speok.] l .N. to speak, only to be interrupted. (a nt.l [orclokcns) . upon'. tlimatures, climes. 137. happilyl haply, perchance. 143. partisan] ' a long-bandled spear, ftar'JJ In .... iew or ( I) Ute sense and 1'ltt H Ol'a our] Clearly idelltifying 141. your] Commonly used in de~ the blade having one or more lateral (2) the confusion of d and e in the I. 1 \,1 - 1 3 LN. til) as a Dane. Uut cr. iv. finitely, without reference: to a cutting projections' (OED). It was :t:lizalx:than ha nd, there can he lillie 129. sofl] peace, break off. So at pa rt icular person addrc5st::u, but borne by OITI CCI'S of the guard. Sec doubt thaI this is the w rrect emen I. v. 5fl, m . i.IIU, Ill. ii . 3[13, I V. ii. 2, imputing to hearers in ge.neral know Sh.'r Eng. , i. 137-8, and cf. Cotgra\,c, dation instead of thr..fim;e which most V. i.'210. Sec OED soft adll. B. ledge of the object condescendingly pertuisane, ' leading-staR'. editors ha .... e tak(~n over fr om Q3. 130. (ross il] i.c. crOM its path, referred to. OED 5 b. Cr. I. v. 175, t 46 S.D. Exit] McManaway sup Cf. F's error a l n. i. 11 2. confront. This, :.u.::cording to popular lII.ii'3, Iv.iii . 21- 3, \1'.1.56- 7, t6S...Q· pO:\C5 the Ghmt dillappears through 125. stilll always. A normal Eliza bd ief, would be to ex.pose oneself The touch of famil iarity, if a Ijllle: onc trap and ri s(':s again through bethan wle. Cr. 1. ii . 104, lI . ii.42, to its baleful influence. The dearh in surprising amid this solemn lIpcech, another (PBS.-t , XUII, 315) ; W. J. I..... ~ ii . li S, ctc. 1594 of Ferdinando, 5th Earl of accord:i wi th thc sceptica.lly tinged Lawrence (Pre-Restoration Slage Sludies, Though 'fate' oftcn mean ,> fafes J Derby (filmou5 in dramatic annals 'they say' and is more in keeping pp. t07~ ) , fo llowing Calvert (An no more than pre-ordaincd end, it as l.ord Strange), was said to ha....c than the quite different fa miliarity Aclor's Hamiel ), that the illusion of the often retains also, cs-p. III the plural, a occurred after a mysterious tall man or the F you spirits, which is addi Ghost's l>ci ng in twO pla c(.~ was quasi-personal significance. (Cr. 3N6 had appear-cd ill his chamber and tiona ll y awkward ..... hen only one i~ effected by having two ghosts (a IV. iii . 5B, '\.Vhat lat(:5 impose, that To be con tracted in one brow ofwoe, 8. sometime] Q.z; sometimes F. g. to] Q2; ofF. J I. an ... 3] Q2; one Yet so far hath discretion fought with nature 5 ... one F. '7. follows that you knowl Q.z .. foll owcs, that you know F; That we with wisest SOrrow think on him follows thal you know: Dowd~n, conj. Walker. 7. DUTy/ves] Though Claudius is no superior kind. For the plural, cr. '79· Let's] Q",QI; Let F. IBo. convenient] Q2; conucniently F,QI. doubt making it appear that the I.i. qOn. marriage concerns not merely him 16. thi.; affair] strictly, tbe marriage. self but the wbolc stale (Kittredge), Thanks for his accc:ssion may be in Seeru: 11 it is not true that ·OI. l~lves· could cluded in 'lor all'. A report of the not rcfcl" to the monarch :llone. Cf. coronation of Chri~lian IV in 1596 SCENE II] F (Suna Sec/Uula); not ;" Q2. S.D.] Florish. Enter Claudius, Kin,lf of describes his c.rowning by the coun Denmarke, Cerfrad tile Q}lune, Counsaile: tu POOmius, and his So/mt Lturtu. Hamlet, R'.J. l.i.16, lII.iii.I'.J.7, Cum AliJs. Q2; Enter Claudius King of Dmmorkt, Gertrude the Qyunt. Hamlet, 8 . .ro1/ulime] former. cillors with lh ~ words 't\cc<'pt from P%f/ius, UurkS, and his SiIlff OPMlio, Lords Attendanl. F; Enter King, Queene, sist«, now 011 ' qllLtn] The incestuous u.s the Crown of this Statc' (SQ., Hamid, uorw, Coramb is, and till IUJ() Ambo.Jsadors, with Alltndanls. QI. nature of the marriage is made clear XVI, 156). to the audience: from the first. ef. '7. follows 111111 you knowl Walkcr's attempted improvem( ~ nt (know:) 1$ ISo. (o llvenienl] For adjcclival forms 1. '57. 'kingdom', etc.) Claudius effects an 9. join/fels1 Not earlier rccordt'tl. adopted by many editol'5, who thus in adverbial usc, see Abbott I, idcntifil.:alion of his audience with Literally, a woman who is in joint make the Council alrcady acquaintoo him~dr. po.ss(,5~iou, nnd bence sometimes with the matt.t,t" that ' now follows'. Sune II 4· contracted in one brow1 Combines explained as 'joinl-mlcr', But nothing But I agree with Si$son (.Nil) that the suggcstions of h Our state 10 be disjoint and out offrame, 20 You, good Cornelius, and you, Voltemand, Colleagued with this dream ofhis advantage, For bearers of this greeting to old NOIway, 35 He hath not fail'd to pester us with message Giving to you no further personal power Imponing the surrender ofthose lands To business with the King more than the scope Lost by his father, with all bonds of law, Ofthese dilated articles allow. To Our most valiant brother. So much for him. 25 Farewell, and let your haste commend your duty. Now for ourself, and for this time ofmeeting, Thus much the business is: we have here writ ~~;. } In that, and all things, will we show our duty. 40 To Norway, uncle of young Fortinbras~ King. We doubt it nothing. Heartily farewell. Who, impolent and bedrid, scarcely hears Exeunt Voltemalld and Cornelius. Ofthis his nephew's purpose~to suppress 30 And now, Laertes, what's the news with you? His further gait herein, in that the levies, You told us ofsome suil: what is't, Laertes? The liSIS, and full proportions are all made You cannot speak ofreason to the Dane OUI ofhis subject; and we here dispatch And lose your voice . What wouldst thou beg, Laertes, 45 That shall not be my offer, not thy asking? :11. Collcaguedl F; Colcaguc:ci Q2; Co-leagued Ca/Mll. this) Q:l; the F. advantage,) adu3lltagc: Q.2,' Aduantage; F. 24. bond!! ] F,' band! Q2. The head is not more native to the heart, 25· him.] Q2; him. I F.rrl« Vol16mand and Cornelius. F. 31. herein.] Q2; hecrein. F. 33· subject1 Q2,F; subjects Q5. 35. bea.ren] Qz,Qr; hearing F. 38. dilated] F; delated Qz~' related Qr. 40. Cor. Volt.] Qz; Voli. F; Gent. Qr. 4t S.D.] F subs"; nol in Q:t,Qr. 20. dujojnt ond out of fTame] cr. 29 · Importing] having for its sub- 45-6. Laertes, ... asking?] F; LaerteJ,? _ .. aski.ng, Qz. ironically .,\1.196, l.i'72, (. iv.go, etc. stance. Dowden rightly reject! frame, systematic order, often re,.. Abbolt's'importuning'. 37. To] ror (Abbott 186). But nothing doubt prevailing'; Ahbott 55. (erring to the created universe. cr. 24· with QU bonds of law] Cf. Kittredge takes 'to business' as an 42. UurUl] 'Caressing him with his lI .ii.2g8; IH.,. !l1. i.16; Mac. 1II.ii. [6 I. i.89-g8. infinitive. name four limes in nine Iinl,.'S' (Dover ('Let lhe frame orlhings disjoint'). '25· So much for him.] Not or course 38. dilated] set out at length. The Wilson), the King shows his gracioU5· 21. ColleaguedJ allied. The assump that Fortinhras is now d isposed or. Q2 delated, which editors have made nes.o; to Polonius's son. But much more tion that it must qualify the subject. But 'so much' for what he has done heavy weather or, is simply a variant important, Shakespeare takes this Fortinbra!$ (I. 17 ), led Warburton and 'now' for my reaction to it. spelling, recorded in MinshCll ('to opportunity of spotlighting the youth and oth ers to explain that Forlinbras 26./or2J the rea~oll for. Delate, or speak at large of anything') who is to be Hamlet's ' image' (d. had only his own dream for an ally. 28. Norway, uncle of)·ollll.t~ Fortinbrar] and amply demonstrated in OED. v. ii. 77 ), foil, foc, and ultimately Dowden and Dover Wilson, with Fortinhras's uncle has !'I ue('eedccl to Neithcr tbe common interpretation kill er. Cr. Intro., p . t33. better sensc if nOI synlax, t Danish ki ng as ' King elect of DCllInark', explaining thal ' though synonym ror kin. as in Gorboduc l I.i. 18, ' I n kind a rather, nol in that Crown be purely elective, yet for these three last Kings, they kincHillcss'. Uut the di ~ ti nc tion there between hind and killdlints.r wrought so wilh the people, that they got their cJdCSl sons chosen, approximatcs to the one Shakcspc;ne makes bClwee-n kin a.n d and declared before their death' (Familiar Ltlters, cd. J acobs, killd. Both words rertr to the members of one ra mily, but whereas p. 294)· From the rererCllCe 10 the Queen asjuilllresJ (1. g) Dover kin has rrgard only to the raC I or relationship, kind has regard a lso \Vilson infers that Gertrude had a life-interes t in the crown, and to ils mallifestation ill a community and mutllality of feeling. Cr. it may be that Shakespeare had in mind how in earlier versions kindltJs , ILii. 577, void of lla tural feeling; Bastard, EpigrallIJ, 15gB, of the story Hamlct's father acquired Ihe throne uy marriage; but iii .29, 'Nevcr so many cousi ns; so few kineJ'. Thc human paradox the rights he accords Gert rude as do\\'agcr he is content not to de lhat kin arc not always kind is ort en cxprcssc:d in Eli;r.abethan fine. VVh at is clear is that Claudius became king before taking her literature (cf. T illey K 38), and the dilTcrent meanings ofkind arc 'to wire' but consoli dated his position by a pruuent marriage. a fa\'ourite sourcc or word-play. Instances are given by K ittredge antI oth('l"s. T he adjective kind, in its Elizabr.than \lse, included L Ii. 1 1. ~Vith an auspicious lind a droppil/g 9t] It was proverbially the modern se nse (' benevolent'), but onr.n rcwined the strong said of the fa lse man that he looks up wi lh one eye and down with primary meaning of ' na tural', and especiall y 's howin~ reelings tbe othcr (c.g. Fcrgusson's Scouish Provtrbs, cd. Beveridge, Scot. natural among blood relations' (ef. Lear's ' unkind' da\lghters). Text Soc., p. 56). This was a variant or the ancient proverb, To Even so, the usual interpretation of the present passage, which laugh with one eye and wecp wilh the other (Tilley E 248), which t ~,k e s kind as a n adjccrive, instead ofa noun in antithesis with kill, was traditionally applied to Fortune (as in Chaucer, BoDie of Ihe necessarily weakens its fo rce. Duchess, II. 633-4) in indication of hcr fickleness. See B. White, 'Claudius a nd FOrl une', Anglia, LXXVU, 204- 7. But though t.his J. ii . 67. ill lht sunl ( 1) Although to Schmidt slLnshine suggests may give the phrase, from Claudius's lips, an ir onic undertone, it 'earch-'ss id\r.Il c.~'i: ('1 .un more can:less and id le than I oug ht to is a mistake to suppose that in itscl rit proclaims him hypocri te. In be'), the- obvious nH~'lnin g or the metaphor is th:ll Hamlet, \villi EIYOI 'S Govemour (II. ch. 12) a woman yir.lds her maidenhead 'with the mclaru;holi c's characteristi c preference for the shade, objects all cye half laughing half mourning' while affirming constancy; to the brightness into which he is brought, whe-ther it lie the glare and Paulina "had one eye declined for the loss of her husband, or puLE e notice (cr. Cald cco tt, ' I am torn prc:maturcly from my a nother c.levatcd that the oracle was rulfilled ' ( Wint. v. ii. 7 - 3). sorrows and thrown illto the broad glare or the sun'), the g 1. ii. 129. sullied] The most debated rcading in the play in recent T he tcxlUal cvidence for sui/itd, moreoverJ can not be d ismissed . years. Earlier editors, with their preference for F, naturally For sall i~d is less Iikdy to he a corruption of solid than the other auoptcd ,oiid, though Furnivall derended the Q,olli mind its near--homonym (solid). which helps to promote the Officiis, l. iv. I I. This lends further significance to the H ypcrion imagery of md t, thaw, r t's%l, dew. Those who accept so me F vflri satyr compariso n .. bove (I. 140). It wa.s through his rcason tbat ants as authentic Shakes pearean alterna tives (cf~ H onigmann, 711e Inan could pcrcei ve the rela tion of cause and cfk ct ancl thus con Stability of Shakespeare's T f. xl, pp. 70, 134-6) arc likely to find an nect past wi lh future, '..\ih ercas the beast, pr eti~ e1y uecause it example here. (But see Intro., p. 43 n.) lacks reason, must li ve largely in tht-: present moment. H enee the axiom tha t its mourning would he brie f. Cr. IV . iv. 33-9; a nd (or r.ii. '40. Hyperion fo a saO'f] The contrast between the two Gertrude's failure to be guided by reason, 111. iv. 38. brothers is repeatedly stressed by Bcl lcforest along with the fact Discourse of rea.wn was a regular ierm, occurring also in. Trail. that the Queen has allied hersclfwith the worse who has killed the II.ii. I 16, as well as in, e.g., Bright's Treatise oJA1elancho/y (dedica better. St C Intro., pp. 9 1- 2. This becomes immensely more sig ni tion), H olla nd's Plutarch (A40raL Vi rlue ), Florio's Monraigne, the ficant in Shtlkcspcare: the antithesis here between the sun-god, translation of La Primaudaye's T he Frmch Academy (rp· 269,278). with his majestic ueauty, and a crea lUre half ma n half beast For other instances, sec Boswc:ll , and OED discourse sb. :2 b. epitomi zes in the two brothers the complex nat.u re of man - like 'NhiJc sometimes appa rently Ilscd as a cliche fo r ' reason', it a god and li_kc a beast. - which witI be a theme of Hamlet's later properly denotes the El cuiL y or process of re(lsoning fr om premises reflecti ons (ct: II. ii. 303- 1); Iv.iv.33- 9; and I. 150 L~ below). The to conclusions. Discourse alone is also use d in the sa me sense imagery enables the basic situation of lh ~ play to a ppear as one (sc_c IV. iv. 36). The 'diseursive reason' \"\' bieh was a prupnty in which the beast in ma n has des troyed the god a nd now reig ns of man \·\"a5 distingllisht.-cJ fr om the higher ' intuitive reason' of in h is kingdom. Sec lntro., pp. [29-32. Even in this fir ::; t soliloquy a ngelic bein gs. In Par. Lost (v. 469 If.) Raphael tells Adam that the contrast between the two brother-kings (cf. 1. Jj2) is not less 'Reason is [the Soul\] being, Discursive or intuitive : discourse important, though less often emphasized, than the re.vclation of Is oftcst yours , the latter Inost is onrs' . BuL the difI'erencc, as Hamlet's sta te of mind and his attitude to hi.'\ mother. Structurally lvfilton says, is of degree ra th(T than kind. the soliloquy effects a link between the presentation of one king in the preceding part of the scene a nd the description of the other I.ii_187. aU in aU] OfLen ta ken to mean; as in modern usc, 'all in the d ialogue whieh follows. The godlike attributes whieh things consicl ered ', 'on the whole'. But whcn Shakespeare uses aU Hamlet sees in his father arc elaborated at IlLiv.S5--62) when the in. all advcrbially, it implics not qualification but intensification contrast is resumed. The idea of man as partaking of bo th god and (= 'c.nti.rcly')' as in 1-1] Li.42; Olh. Iv.i. U8> 262. The sense here is beast whieh thus underlies the play is very much the Renaissance not that of wcighing one thi ng against ;\Ilo ther but of accumu concept. No single illustra tion can suffice, but e f. Pico della la ting them a ll. In lII . iv.S;,- 62 it is th·e accuTli.ulatjon of perfec Mirandola , Dt hnminis digllilale, and especially [he o pening pages : ti ons lhat assures 'a man'. H a mlet's f1tt her, then, may be ta ken as 'i\"cithcl' heavenly nor earthly ... thou cans!: grow dmvnward a man complete in every particular, a.nd so as the sum a nd pattern into the lower natures which arc brutcs. Thou canst again grow of excellence. Cf. NlaLlbc, Celestina (perhaps an echo), where a list. up\vard from thy soul's rcason into the higher na tures which are of perfect ions is brought to a climax in 'T ake him all together, and divine.' 'Ifyou see anyone . .. delivered over to the senses, il is a for all in all , you shall no t find such another'. This sense of com brute not a man that you sec. If yo u come upon a philosopher pleteness or perfect ion is bome out by olhc l- Elizabelha n in winnowing out all things by ri ght reason, h ~ is a heavenly not an stances : e.g. Stubbes, Analonry of Abuses (New Shaks pcrc Soc. , i. earthly animaL' 'We are made similar to brutes and mindless 29) 'IH~ is all in all; yea, so perfect .. ,' ; R . Carew, T he Excellency beasts of burden. But .. . as Asaph the prophet says, " Ye are all of the EngLish T ongue. (Smith, Eli:::n Critical Essa).'s, ii. 293), 'vVili gods, a nd sons of the mOs t high '" (tra ns. C. G. ''''ailis, 1940, you have aU in all for prose and verse? take the miracle of our age pp. 5- 7)· Sir Philip Sidney'. See, for an illuminating discussion, D. Barrett in }.'euphilologischt A.fillrilllllgell , LXII, 164--8. cr. Tilley 1\ 133, 'All 1. ii. I :;0. wants discourse of reaso 1l1 The f~ lClllt y of reason was in all and a ll in every par t') a proverb which T. \V. Baldwin traditionally rt cognize: d as the crucial di"fferencc between ma n (/.iterary Gen ~ t ics of SlwksjJe rc's Poems, pp. 157fT.) shows to derive and the beasts, for the classical slatement of which sec Cicero, De fr om. the nco-Platonic doclrine of the so ul.